Saturday, November 21, 2009

Civil Democratic Islam: a new USA's strategies to avoid the evolution of muslim

Saya selesai membaca Buku Bertajuk Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, Strategies. Buku ini adalah kajian CIA yang dikeluarkan melalui agensi dibawahnya National Security Research Division (RAND). Sememangnyaa RAND telah sekelian lama menjalankan kajian terhadap ummat Islam dan merupakan think tank bagi tindakan strategic US terutama bagi menghadapi kebangkitan Islam.Buku Civil Democratic Islam (CDI) ini boleh saya katakan antara kertas kerja yang paling progresif pernah dikeluarkan oleh RAND. Melihat tajuknya serba sedikit telah menggambarkan apa kandungan intipatinya.


Dalam pendahuluan bagi buku ini, tanpa selindung penulis mengumumkan bahawa musuh utama dunia (baca: US) adalah Islam yang akan menyebabkan perubahan ideology baru dunia. Maka buku ini adalah strategi yang perlu diambil US untuk menghalang kebangkitan ini. CDI mengklasifikasikan ummat Islam kepada 4 golongan yang mana setiap golongan ini mempunyai penerimaan yang berbeza terhadap nilai-nilai barat dan strategi menghadapi mereka juga berbeza.

Golongan pertama
adalah golongan fundamentalis. Ciri utama golongan fundamentalis adalah mereka sama sekali menolak demokrasi, hak asasi manusia dan seluruh nilai-nilai barat. Inilah musuh US yang tidak boleh bertolak-ansur. Mereka secara spesifik merujuk kepada Hizbut Tahrir dan gerakan-gerakan jihad yang menuju khilafah.

Golongan kedua
adalah golongan tradisionalis. Golongan tradisionalis ini lebih menumpukan soal kerohanian dan keilmuan. Walaupun ada yang terlibat dengan politik, tetapi pemikiran mereka lebih tertumpu soal kerohanian. Golongan yang dikaitkan adalah seperti golongan wahhabi dan ulama-ulama yang lebih cenderung membahas ilmu berbanding soal politik.

Golongan ketiga
adalah golongan modenis. Golongan modenis ini mereka mahu melihat Islam menjadi sebahagian dari kemajuan global. Mereka memberi nafas Islam bagi nilai-nilai barat seperti demokrasi, hak asasi manusia, perekonomian dan nilai-nilai lain. Ia merujuk kepada sesetengah ulama dan pemikir Islam hari ini.

golongan yang keempat
adalah golongan sekular yang telah mengikut acuan barat termasuk pemerintah yang ada dan tokoh-tokoh pemikir mereka.


Jika kita teliti,US menjadikan sejauh mana penerimaan atau penolakan ummat Islam kepada nilai-nilai barat seperti demokrasi, hak asasi manusia, perundangan, ekonomi dan nilai-nilau utama lain untuk mengklasifikasikan ummat Islam. Kita tidak terperangkap dengan klasifikasi ini kerana sebenarnya mereka mengklasifikasikan ummat Islam untuk kepentingan mereka menghadapi kebangkitan Islam. Dari situ mereka menetapkan kaedah dan strategi berbeza, bergantung kepada bentuk pemikiran ummat Islam.

Dalam bab yang kedua, dibahaskan strategi untuk mencari ˜partner" untuk apa yang mereka sebut menerima demokrasi Islam.
Dalam perenggan yang pertama digariskan bahawa, mempromosi demokrasi dalam dunia Islam dan membantu perlaksanaannya adalah suatu tindakan jangka panjang untuk usaha menentang kebangkitan Islam. Dari penulisan buku ini, mereka seringkali menegaskan bahawa sokongan yang sekian lama diberikan kepada golongan sekular- golongan pemerintah dan pemikir sekular- bukan lagi tindakan yang semestinya tepat untuk keadaan geopolitik hari ini. Ini kerana, kebanyakan orang Islam sudah menyedari maneuver golongan ini dan tidak menjadikan mereka sebagai rujukan dalam masalah politik mahupun agama.

Oleh itu RAND mencadangkan, untuk memberi sokongan, peluang-peluang muncul di akhbar, ruang untuk berpolitik, memberikan pendapat, ruang-ruang melalui NGO dan penonjolan bagi golongan Islam yang modenis. Ini kerana golongan modenis mereka walaupun tidak menerima demokrasi barat sepenuhnya, tetapi mereka masih tetap menerima demokrasi cuma dalam kerangka yang mereka anggap Islam. Maka mereka perlu diberikan peluang bergerak dalam politik demokrasi dan sokongan atas-atas tekanan golongan sekular terhadap mereka. Pemimpin dan tokoh-tokoh golongan Islam modenis perlu diberi penghormatan dan pengiktirafan.

Manakala golongan tradisionalis, mereka kurang membahaskan masalah politik. Maka kebiasaannya golongan tradisionalis tidak mempunyai pandangan yang khusus tentang demokrasi dan konsep politik lain. Maka golongan ini perlu digunakan untuk menyerang pandangan golongan fundamentalis yang menolak nilai barat secara keseluruhan. Ia dengan cara memberikan ruang kepada ulama seperti ini mengalihkan pandangan ummat, dan menimbulkan keraguan ummat terhadap golongan fundamentalis. Ini kerana golongan tradisionalis biasa mempunyai pengaruh yang kuat dalam ummat, menguasai madrasah-madrasah dan institusi pendidikan tradisional. Manakala bagi ulama tradisionalis yang boleh menerima nilai barat walau secara selektif, mereka ini wajar diberi ruang untuk kedepan. Maka dengan ini nilai-nilai barat seperti demokrasi, hak asasi manusia, pengagihan kuasa, perundangan dan ekonomi boleh disemai dalam pemikiran ummat Islam. Dalam masalah demokrasi dan penerimaan nilai barat, golongan fundamentalis digariskan RAND sebagai musuh utama yang tidak boleh dikompromi dan sememangnya tidak boleh dibawa berkompromi.

Dalam bab ketiga, RAND menerangkan strategi-strategi untuk menghadapi golongan-golongan ini, baik samada berkawan dengan golongan ini, mengadu-domba mereka agar berseteru mahupun secara langsung menyerang mereka.

Secara umumnya, golongan Islam modenis hendaklah diberi peluang dan sokongan politik, memberi pandangan Islam kontemporari. Ini kerana golongan Islam modenis hari ini telah dapat menarik sokongan rakyat berbanding pemerintah sekular. Sokongan kepada golongan Islam modenis ini boleh diberi secara langsung atau tidak secara langsung selagi dapat dipastikan kepercayaan ummat tidak terhakis. Benarkan mereka menyebarkan pandangan-pandangan mereka.

Manakala sokongan kepada kerajaan sekular hanya diberi berdasarkan kes per kes basis. Ini kerana, banyak kerajaan sekular yang bersifat nasionalis hingga mengabaikan kepentingan US. Oleh itu, sokongan kepada mereka bergantung kes per kes basis.

Bagi golongan tradisionalis, ulama-ulama mereka perlu digunakan untuk menyerang golongan fundamentalis. Ini merupakan golongan yang terbaik yang perlu digunakan untuk menyerang fundamentalis kerana golongan ini mempunyai kemuliaan yang tinggi dikacamata ummat. Keupayaan mereka membahas agama perlu digunakan, untuk menyerang pemikiran-pemikiran politik golongan fundamentalis. Secara spesifik disebut, bahawa golongan tradisionalis ini wajar disokong untuk mewujudkan perseteruan sesame Islam dan secara spesifik disebut mereka ini wajar diberi dana untuk membina sekolah-sekolah untuk menyebarkan fahaman mereka. Secara jelas diberitahu, segala kerjasama antara golongan tradisionalis dengan golongan fundamentalisme mestilah dihalang dan sepatutnya diwujudkan permusuhan sesame mereka.

Bagi menghadapi golongan yang mereka labelkan sebagai fundamentalis, digariskan agar jangan memberi promosi, serang nilai-nilai yang dibawa, hilangkan kepercayaan ummat kepada mereka, wujudkan gambaran mereka ekstrimis dan tidak mampu membawa kemakmuran. Tidak ada sikap lain kepada golongan fundamentalis kecuali menentang dan menghancurkan mereka.

Itulah ringkasan apa yang digariskan oleh RAND untuk US menghadapi kebangkitan Islam. Mereka melabelkan kita, untuk memudahkan mereka menentang kebangkitan Islam, walhal hakikatnya tidak begitu. Kita semua bukan fundamentalis, tradisionalis, modenis atau sekular. Cuma RAND mengklasifikasikan kita mengikut sejauh mana penerimaan kita terhadap nilai-nilai US dan dari situ diatur strategi yang berbeza. Saya yakin ramai ummat Islam yang ikhlas berjuang tidak menyedari hal ini dan tidak sedar mereka bergerak dalam acuan yang sememangnya diatur oleh CIA. Inilah pentingnya ummat Islam terutama gerakan-gerakan Islam mempunyai kesedaran politik yang sangat jernih lagi tajam. Semoga ia membuka minda politik kita untuk melihat dunia dengan kacamaata politik Islam agar dengan itu kita dapat bergerak menuju kebangkitan Islam.

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Working mothers' children unfit


Children whose mothers work are less likely to lead healthy lives than those with "stay at home" mothers, a study says.

The Institute of Child Health study of more than 12,500 five-year-olds found those with working mothers less active and more likely to eat unhealthy food.

Other experts said more work was needed to see if the results applied to other age groups.

The study is in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

About 60% of mothers with children aged up to five are estimated to be in work.

With many more mums having no choice but to work these days and with government policy actively encouraging it, it is difficult to know how mums can do better

Sally Russell, Netmums


Results

The mothers were asked about the hours they worked and their children's diet, exercise levels and sedentary activities.

A third of the mothers had not worked since the birth of their child, but the mothers who were employed were spending an average of 21 hours a week at work.

They took into account factors likely to influence the results, such as the mothers' level of education and socioeconomic circumstances.

They found that five-year-olds whose mothers worked part-time or full-time were more likely to primarily consume sweetened drinks between meals.

They used their computers or watched television for at least two hours a day compared to the children of "stay at home" mothers who spent less than two hours on these activities.

They were also more likely to be driven to school compared to the children of "stay at home" mothers who tended to walk or cycle.

The children whose mothers had a flexible working pattern did have healthier lifestyles but when other factors were taken into account the researchers said there was little evidence that these children behaved more healthily.

'Time constraints'

Debbie Bird: "'Being a working mum is very challenging"

Professor Catherine Law, who led the study, said they had not looked at fathers in this study because fathers employment levels had not changed whereas the numbers of working mothers had increased dramatically.

She said: "For many families the only parent or both parents will be working.

"Time constraints may limit parents' capacity to provide their children with healthy foods and opportunities for physical activity.

"Our results do not imply that mothers should not work.

"Rather they highlight the need for policies and programmes to help support parents."

The same children took part in an earlier study by the Institute of Child Health (ICH) which found that those with working mothers were more likely to be obese or overweight by the age of three.

In the latest study, many of the five-year-olds were engaging in health behaviours likely to promote excess weight gain: 37% were mainly eating crisps and sweets between meals, 41% were consuming sweetened drinks and 61% used the television or a computer at least two hours daily.

'Controversial research'

Glenys Jones, nutritionist with the Medical Research Council Human Nutrition Research, said the study was interesting because of limited research so far on the impact of maternal employment on child health choices.

"More work is needed to take into account factors such as how related health behaviours are affected and if the age of the child alters the relationships observed."

Sally Russell, a spokesman for Netmums, said: "The stress and guilt associated with being a working mum is something we are all too well aware of. This report adds to that guilt.

"With many more mums having no choice but to work these days and with government policy actively encouraging it, it is difficult to know how mums can do better. "

A Department of Health spokesman said: "Our Change4Life movement is already helping over 370,000 families eat well, move more and live longer by helping them to understand the harm that fat and added sugar can cause to children's health, and offering them simple yet effective ways to make changes to their diet and increase their activity levels."

Depression link to processed food


Eating a diet high in processed food increases the risk of depression, research suggests.

What is more, people who ate plenty of vegetables, fruit and fish actually had a lower risk of depression, the University College London team found.

Data on diet among 3,500 middle-aged civil servants was compared with depression five years later, the British Journal of Psychiatry reported.

The team said the study was the first to look at the UK diet and depression.
They split the participants into two types of diet - those who ate a diet largely based on whole foods, which includes lots of fruit, vegetables and fish, and those who ate a mainly processed food diet, such as sweetened desserts, fried food, processed meat, refined grains and high-fat dairy products.

After accounting for factors such as gender, age, education, physical activity, smoking habits and chronic diseases, they found a significant difference in future depression risk with the different diets.

Those who ate the most whole foods had a 26% lower risk of future depression than those who at the least whole foods.

By contrast people with a diet high in processed food had a 58% higher risk of depression than those who ate very few processed foods.

The UK population is consuming less nutritious, fresh produce and more saturated fats and sugars

Dr Andrew McCulloch, Mental Health Foundation


Mediterranean diet

Although the researchers cannot totally rule out the possibility that people with depression may eat a less healthy diet they believe it is unlikely to be the reason for the findings because there was no association with diet and previous diagnosis of depression.

Study author Dr Archana Singh-Manoux pointed out there is a chance the finding could be explained by a lifestyle factor they had not accounted for.

"There was a paper showing a Mediterranean diet was associated with a lower risk of depression but the problem with that is if you live in Britain the likelihood of you eating a Mediterranean diet is not very high.

"So we wanted to look at bit differently at the link between diet and mental health."

It is not yet clear why some foods may protect against or increase the risk of depression but scientists think there may be a link with inflammation as with conditions such as heart disease.

Dr Andrew McCulloch, chief executive of the Mental Health Foundation, said: "This study adds to an existing body of solid research that shows the strong links between what we eat and our mental health.

"Major studies like this are crucial because they hold the key to us better understanding mental illness."

He added people's diets were becoming increasingly unhealthy.

"The UK population is consuming less nutritious, fresh produce and more saturated fats and sugars.

"We are particularly concerned about those who cannot access fresh produce easily or live in areas where there are a high number of fast food restaurants and takeaways."

Margaret Edwards, head of strategy at the mental health charity SANE, said: "Physical and mental health are closely related, so we should not be too surprised by these results, but we hope there will be further research which may help us to understand more fully the relationship between diet and mental health."