,
21 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
I am asked what is the cause of all of this. This question deserves a separate thread:
Here is my thought: Dhimmitude was both a legal code and a social framework. As a legal code it involved things like restrictions on church building, prohibition on riding horses or carrying arms, forcing Copts to wear special colored cloths.
But as a social framework it was much more. It involved the idea that Copts should be subjugated. That Islam should be supreme in its lands, and that Copts (and other minorities) should acknowledge that. The very notion of equality was explicitly rejected.
When you read Jabarti for example in his history of the French invasion, the things that angers him the most is the fact that some non-Muslims acted as equals to Muslims utilizing the French presence.
Slowly the legal code was changed. 1817 was the last time Copts were forced to wear special colored cloths. 1855/56 Jizya was abolished and Copts conscripted. This has led many to assume Dhimmitude ended.
In reality it hadn't. Only the legal code was changed, the societal framework remained in place. I will mention two incidents both just prior to 1919 revolution.
When Boutros Pasha Ghali was appointed Prime Minister, one of Egypt's most famous writers wrote that the appointment of a non-Muslim was an insult to Islam.
The second was when Boutros Pasha was assassinated. It remains an open question how much his religion played a role. The murder was a nationalist who claimed nationalist grounds for his act, but the mob hailed him as a Muslim who killed a Christian.
El Waradani qatal Al Nosrani was the chant (El Wardani has killed the Christian). Interestingly enough this is when the song qoulo le 3een el shams ma te7mashy (Tell the eye of the sun not to heat up) was written for the assassin.
But leave this aside for a moment, the assassin was turned over to Mufti to pass on the death sentence. The Mufti faced a problem. The Jurists had argued for centuries that a Muslim's live could not be equal to a non-Muslim, but the murdered was the Prime Minister.
So he invented a solution. Sharia had no punishment for murder by pistol, so hence he couldn't pass the death sentence :)
The British of course had little appetite for such nonsense and hanged El Wardani anyway.
The British of course had little appetite for such nonsense and hanged El Wardani anyway.
It was actually the British who removed some of the last legal restrictions on Copts allowing Copts for the first time to enter the schools of engineering, law, medicine and teaching in 1880's and 1890's.
But while the legal restrictions were removed, the social framework and mindset never changed. Copts would continue to face this social subjugation until today. Simply put, the legal code was changed from above, society never changed.
This is the sentiment that leads people to protest the building of churches. They dont want to kill Copts, they also dont mind them praying. It is the public manifestation of Christianity that offends them.
This is why reconciliation sessions often come up with things like: you can pray but the building should have no crosses, no dome, no tower, and no bells. It is the public manifestation of Christianity that offends them.
Why? Because it clashes with the idea of the supremacy of Islam in its own land and with the supposed subjugation of Copts.
This is why the public celebration of a conversion is so important to them, because it is testament to Islam being supreme. The Copts need to be humiliated. They need to feel inferior and act as such.
This is also why it is women that often are the subject of such incidents. Because in this mentality, women are viewed as the spoils of war. The Coptic tribe needs to feel humiliated by one of its women being taken away from it. It needs to feel violated.
Now why do police officers participate in this? The simple answer is because they are normal citizens. The regime is composed of people who are part of society not some aliens from Mars.
They were brought up in the same society, went through same education, hold same beliefs as rest of society. What happened was not a regime policy. It was a society expressing its core beliefs.
This is why, although a part of the Coptic problem requires government action, there will never be a true solution, until we address the pathologies of society.
