{"id":4857,"date":"2026-08-15T07:42:05","date_gmt":"2026-08-15T07:42:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/?p=4857"},"modified":"2026-08-15T07:42:07","modified_gmt":"2026-08-15T07:42:07","slug":"can-we-rise-while-fearing-one-another","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/?p=4857&lang=en","title":{"rendered":"Can We Rise While Fearing One Another?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

A civilization is weakened not so much by external enemies as by an internal inability to tolerate those who think differently.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This week, we wish to explore this topic based on an interview Metin Y\u0131kar conducted with historian Mustafa Kaya, who serves at the University of Chicago (https:\/\/youtu.be\/mAmTm9lpKho<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhy did the Islamic world decline?\u201d Was religion an obstacle? Did the Ottomans make mistakes? Did the printing press arrive too late? Did the West exploit the region? Did the \u201culema\u201d oppose science? Or did Muslims simply become complacent?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kaya invites us to consider trade routes, political structures, state-society relations, sectarian conflicts, and the transformations Europe underwent\u2014all in conjunction with one another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One can draw the following conclusion from the interview: Civilizations do not rise merely by generating good ideas; they rise to the extent that they create environments where ideas, people, and capital can circulate freely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Islamic world must ask itself: Are we building open societies where we can coexist with differences, or are we expending our energy on controlling, silencing, and purging one another?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When a merchant set out from Khorasan to Baghdad, and from there to Damascus and Cairo, he carried more than just fabrics and spices; he also transported news, ideas, techniques, and culture. When a scholar traveled from Bukhara to Damascus, and onward to Cairo or the Hejaz, books, questions, and methodologies traveled right along with him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Intelligent people alone are not enough for the advancement of knowledge; there is also a need for intelligent people to encounter one another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Europe, diverse spheres emerged\u2014comprising cities, merchants, universities, religious groups, and later, corporations\u2014where actors could operate with relative independence from central authority. In the Islamic world, particularly during the era of the great “gunpowder empires,” the state became increasingly powerful, centralized, and regulatory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This undoubtedly had its advantages. It ensured stability. It raised vast armies. It collected taxes. It secured the roads. It kept empires intact for centuries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet stability comes at a price. If the space for society to organize itself shrinks as the state grows stronger, order may be gained in the short term, but creativity is lost in the long term. When the state dominates the economy, the scope of action for the independent merchant narrows; when it dominates religion, that of the independent cleric shrinks; and when it dominates education, the independent academic\u2019s room for maneuver is curtailed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the most thought-provoking parts of the interview concerns the rise of the Safavids and the ensuing sectarian polarization. At a certain point, the two Muslim empires were not merely warring with each other; they also harbored suspicions regarding the religious loyalty of their own subjects. It is at this juncture that the “other” within becomes just as much of a threat as the rival without.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Five hundred years later, we still see Muslim societies expending a tremendous amount of energy categorizing one another:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are you Sunni or Shia?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are you secular or Islamist?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do you belong to this \u201ccemaat\u201d (community) or that \u201ctarikat (religious order)?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are you close to the ruling power, or are you in the opposition?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are you one of “us,” or one of “them”?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A civilization may weaken due to external rivals. But far more dangerous is the destruction of its own human capital because it fails to manage its internal differences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This can be illustrated with current events. While mass purges and crackdowns against the Hizmet movement continue (https:\/\/silencedturkey.org\/july-15-coup-and-purge<\/a>), a large-scale operation is currently underway in Turkey against the community affiliated with the tradition of S\u00fcleyman Hilmi Tunahan\u2014publicly known as the “S\u00fcleymanc\u0131lar” (https:\/\/bianet.org\/haber\/suleymancilara-17-ilde-operasyon-alihan-kuris-dahil-30-kisi-gozaltinda-322495<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why does Turkey struggle so much to sustain religious and civil groups as natural elements of a pluralistic social structure within the framework of the rule of law? At one time, a particular religious community becomes the state’s favorite, while another is viewed as a threat. Political balances shift, and roles change. What was acceptable yesterday is objectionable today; what was objectionable yesterday may become acceptable tomorrow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a society where the state decides which religious structure is “good” and which is “bad,” neither religion nor the state is free.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new joint defense agreement signed by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan is also worth examining from this historical perspective. Under the agreement, an armed attack on any one of the three countries will be considered an attack on the others as well (https:\/\/www.reuters.com\/world\/asia-pacific\/saudi-arabia-turkey-pakistan-sign-joint-defence-deal-amid-regional-turmoil-2026-08-07\/<\/a>). The prospect of three major Sunni-majority nations\u2014Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan\u2014establishing a new security architecture amidst the highly tense regional environment shaped by the Iran-Israel-US conflict evokes the Ottoman-Safavid world of five centuries ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why cannot a system of cooperation, akin to military alliances, be established among Cairo, Istanbul, Tehran, Riyadh, Islamabad, and other centers for science, technology, trade, and academic exchange?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why are joint universities, research funds, and student mobility not discussed as frequently as joint defense mechanisms?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Knowledge flourishes in environments where a researcher\u2019s passport is not scrutinized, an idea is not judged based on sectarian or political affiliation, and universities are not tasked with validating the ruling power’s truths.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You cannot say the following to a scientist:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cYou are free to think, but do not think about this specific subject.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cYou may collaborate globally, but do not work with a researcher from that particular country.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cYou may publish your findings, provided they do not contradict government policy.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Throughout the 20th century, one of the key drivers of US scientific supremacy was its ability to attract people from all corners of the globe. Its universities were hubs where not only Americans but also Chinese, Indian, Iranian, Turkish, and European researchers\u2014along with scholars from many other regions\u2014could work. However, a climate of pressure and decline is now being observed in US universities as well, particularly during the second Trump administration. The current actions of the US risk undermining\u2014by its own hand\u2014the open and free academic environment that once made it a scientific powerhouse (https:\/\/www.acenet.edu\/Policy-Advocacy\/Pages\/2025-Trump-Administration-Transition.aspx<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If, within a society, Sunnis constantly suspect Shias, secularists suspect the devout, one religious community suspects another, academics suspect the state, and the state suspects its own citizens, then a vast amount of that society’s mental energy is consumed by defensiveness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To return to the conversation: characterizing the last five hundred years of the Islamic world simply as a period of “decline” is, historically speaking, undoubtedly debatable. This span of five centuries encompasses eras of immense achievement in art, thought, science, state-building, and social transformation. Nor can the rise of Europe be explained solely by the mistakes made by Muslims; a multitude of processes\u2014such as Atlantic trade, colonialism, the scientific revolution, industrialization, and the development of legal and financial institutions\u2014played a combined role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet, there is a powerful lesson we can carry forward from the long historical narrative Mustafa Kaya recounts: the greatest wealth of civilizations lies not in their territories, armies, or underground resources, but in open networks where people can freely interact with one another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps this is the “golden age” humanity truly needs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not larger armies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not grander palaces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not greater obedience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But more freedom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More encounters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More curiosity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And less fear of one another.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A civilization is weakened not so much by external enemies as by an internal inability to tolerate those who think differently. This week, we wish to explore this topic based on an interview Metin Y\u0131kar conducted with historian Mustafa Kaya, who serves at the University of Chicago (https:\/\/youtu.be\/mAmTm9lpKho). \u201cWhy did the Islamic world decline?\u201d Was […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":4858,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[116],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4857","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news-en"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/academicsolidarity.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/20260815Islam.png?fit=1448%2C1086&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4857","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4857"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4857\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4859,"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4857\/revisions\/4859"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/4858"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4857"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4857"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/academicsolidarity.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4857"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}