Qualities and Experiences of the First Eleven Imams

 

The Shi’ites maintain the view that Prophet Mohammad appointed Ali ibn Abi Talib as his successor and Imam. Therefore, Ali became the first Imam. He was succeeded by eleven other Imams as recognized by Twelver Shi‘ites. The traditional biographies of the first eleven Imams depict several similarities. Therefore, it is notable that these Imams shared several qualities and experiences during their respective Imamates.

One of the qualities shared by several of the Imams is the quiet lives they lived. Except for Ali, the succeeding Imams led largely politically quiet lives. Ali is excluded from this quality as he was also the fourth Caliph (Momen 24). For instance, after renouncing the Caliphate to Mu’awiya, Hasan retired to a quiet life until his death (Momen 27). Also, Husayn who was the third Imam did not make any political moves during Mu’awiya’s reign as Caliph. He only did so after the Caliph’s death with his unsuccessful move from Mecca towards Kufa (Momen 29). Furthermore, Zaynu’l-‘Abidin lived a secluded life during his imamate. It is reported that he spent most of his time weeping for the martyrs of Karbala (Momen 36). These are the people who were killed while accompanying Husayn towards Kufa. Muhammad al-Baqir, the fifth Imam, also followed in the footsteps of his father by living a mostly dormant life. Another example is the Imamate of Ja’far as-Sadiq. as-Sadiq spent part of his Imamate quietly teaching in Medina (Momen 38). It was only after the accession of the Abbasids to the Caliph that as-Sadiq’s harassment began. These are all examples of the quiet lives of the Imams.

The majority of the first eleven Imams suffered and were killed under the Caliphs. Hasan, for instance, is reported to have been poisoned by his wife at the encouragement of Mu’awiya who was the caliph at the time (Momen 28). Husayn was attacked by the Umayyad army under the orders of Yazid who was the Caliph. The attack resulted in the death of Husayn and many of the Shi’is who accompanied him. Zaynu’l-‘Abidin was imprisoned and ultimately poisoned under the orders of the reigning Caliph (Momen 37). This was despite having lived a secluded life. Musa al- Kazim, the seventh Imam, is reported to have been harassed throughout his life. These actions of hostility were carried out by the Abbasid Caliphs (Momen 39). The Imam was arrested at least once in Baghdad (Momen 40). Also, during the Caliphate of Mutawakkil, the Shi’is faced a lot of persecution. It was during this period that Ali al-Hadi, the tenth Imam, was held as a prisoner of the Caliph until his demise. Hasan al-‘Askari, the eleventh Imam, suffered the same fate as his father, al-Hadi. He is known to have lived an almost lifetime of detention in Samarra (Momen 44). The detention was overseen by the reigning Caliph until the death of the Imam. Momen notes that the Shi’i histories maintain that al-‘Askari, like many other preceding Imams, was also poisoned by the Caliph (44). These instances depict the suffering and killings of the Imams by the Caliphs.

The other quality shared by many of the Imams was a peaceful nature. Notably, the Imams did not call out for war even when they were assured of supporters. Except for Caliph Ali, none of the other Imams were involved in a war. Husayn is shown to have avoided bloodshed during his move towards Kufa. After being intercepted by al-Hurr at-Tamimi, the commander of a military detachment, Husayn agreed to alter his direction and head away from Kufa (Momen 29). Even after the second interception, Husayn requested his enemies to allow him to withdraw to Arabia (Momen 30). Although this wish was not granted, it was meant to avoid any bloodshed. Additionally, Hasan’s renouncing of the Caliphate is viewed by many Shi’is as a move to avoid bloodshed. Many of the other Imams lived quiet and peaceful lives as explained earlier. The Imamate of Ja’far as-Sadiq, the sixth Imam, further demonstrates this point. During his Imamate, there were many political events. These included Zayd’s revolt in 122/740 and the Abbasid uprising that began in 129/747 (Momen 38). Despite these events, as-Sadiq remained peaceful and politically quiet.

Finally, the Imams remained true to the teachings of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. Caliph Ali, the first Imam, worked to ensure that the community adhered to the aspects of life taught by the prophet (Momen 24). Also, Husayn’s move towards Kufa was largely driven by the reports of Caliph Yazid’s anti-Islamic ways. Yazid was reported to break the laws of Islam (Momen 28). as-Sadiq, the sixth Imam, is renowned for his devotion to Islam. He dedicated most of his time to learning the Islamic ways. As a result, he taught many students who went on to become scholars (Momen 38). Despite the hostilities from the Caliphs, the Imams continued to offer guidance to the people regarding religious matters.

The first Eleven Imams recognized by Twelver Shi‘ites shared several qualities and experiences during their respective lifetimes. Among the qualities were the love for peace, dedication to the Islamic religion, and preference for quiet lives. Many also shared the life experience of suffering and being killed under the Caliphs.

Work Cited

Momen, Moojan. “The Lives of the Imams and Early Divisions Among the Shi’is.” An Introduction to Shi’i Islam: The History and Doctrines of Twelver Shi’ism.” Yale University Press, 1985, pp. 23-45.

Mediators and Moderators

 

Part A

Mediation and moderation are types of detailed examinations of variables. They aim to determine the relationship between variables. Mediation uses variables referred to as mediators. Such variables account for the relationship between the predictor and outcome by explaining why certain effects occur. For instance, we can consider a relationship where social-economic deprivation leads to low self-esteem in the youth. The mediator, in this case, can be the limited youth employment prospects. It explains why this relationship exists (Curtis et al. 82). When the youth have high employment prospects, the relationship between the predictor and outcome no longer holds. Variables in moderation are called moderators. These explain the variability in outcomes. They also influence the strength of the relationship between the predictor and the outcome. For example, one may consider a study of the relationship between school examinations and anxiety. In such a case, the moderator can be exam preparedness. Students who are better prepared for exams are less anxious than those who are unprepared.

Part B

This study presents the relationship between a socially toxic community and internalizing mental health problems. A moderation model can be used in studying this relationship. This involves examining the conditions under which a socially toxic community leads to internalizing mental health problems. A possible moderator is a guidance and counseling program. Those who are counseled are less likely to internalize mental health problems such as fear, anxiety, and depression. Therefore, this moderator variable influences the strength between the predictor and the outcome. For instance, youth from low socio-economic backgrounds can handle depression well under guidance and counseling. Also, youth who are exposed to violence/bullying are less likely to be affected by low self-esteem if they are taken under the guidance and counseling process.

 

Work Cited

Curtis, Sarah, et al. “Neighbourhood Risk Factors for Common Mental Disorders among Young People Aged 10–20 Years: A Structured Review of Quantitative Research.” Health & Place, Vol. 20, 2013, pp. 81-90.

 

Life and Society in Europe during the Industrial Revolution

 

The industrial revolution changed life in Europe. Before this historic occurrence, agriculture was the main economic activity. However, the increased population in the mid-eighteenth century called for other means of income. This was concurrent with the rise of laissez-faire capitalists who advocated for the pursuit of private profits. More industries were, therefore, established. Urbanization was on the rise as more people moved to urban areas in search of employment (Steckel and Floud 17). The typical daily life of the workers involved long working hours. This applied to men, women, and children. Women’s lifestyle changed drastically as they took up jobs in textile industries. Children were not spared as they were also overworked in the factories. In addition to long working hours, the working environment was dangerous with regular accidents occurring (Steckel and Floud 66). There was no employee welfare. Additionally, the workers lived in constant fear of unemployment and hunger.

Such changes in life remodeled society in Europe. Different social classes emerged. They included the middle class and the working class. These were distinguished by their wealth. On one side were the prosperous industrialists who used the workers’ labor to accumulate wealth. On the other hand was the poor working class who languished in poverty amid meager pay. Several groups were displeased by such conditions and rose to call for change. Among these were welfare liberals. Together with trade unions, they advocated for improvement in social welfare, labor rights, and education, among others. Consequently, towards the mid-nineteenth century, the government intervened to set labor laws (Steckel and Floud 170). Despite the tough life during the industrial revolution, it was marked by several advancements. Such include the development of transportation systems such as the railroad which eased the movement of people and goods.

 

Work Cited

Steckel, Richard H., and Roderick Floud, eds. Health and Welfare during Industrialization. University of Chicago Press, 2008.

Populism Ideology

Populism

Question One: Populism Ideology

Populism is a term often used in politics and media to represent a political ideology. Although this is the case, the term lacks a comprehensible definition. This is unlike other ideologies such as liberalism, socialism, or fascism. The lack of a clear meaning of populism has led to criticism of the term (Mudde and Kaltwasser, 1). Critics argue that the term is vague. They also dismiss it as a term used to denounce political opponents. Although this may be the case, some scholars have maintained that populism is an ideology that cannot simply be dismissed.

To elaborate on any political ideology, one must show its explanation or views of human nature and society. The same case applies to populism. However, this ideology is limited in its definition of these terms. Mudde and Kaltwasser attribute this limitation to the fact that populism is a “thin-centered ideology” (6). Such ideologies tend to attach themselves to full ideologies such as liberalism or fascism. For instance, populism borrows some ideas of liberalism. In other cases, it borrows aspects of nationalism from fascism leading to the classification of the ideology as right-wing. Despite these attachments to other ideologies, populism has unique concepts that set it aside.

Human Nature. It is difficult to have a full grasp of the concept of human nature in populism. The reason for this, as I see it, is that populism is mainly concerned with “the people” as a collective. In this way, it differs from liberalism which is concerned with the individual. Instead, it leans towards some aspects of the concept of nationalism that is embraced by fascists. This is not to say that populists share the same views of human nature as fascists. This is far from the case. Fascists view people as irrational beings driven by emotion and passion. This depicts human nature as unreliable. On the other hand, populists believe that people are reliable and capable of governing themselves. Hence, populism is closely associated with liberal democracy. Human nature in populism is mainly understood in terms of good and bad (Mudde and Kaltwasser 6). The common people are believed to be homogenously good while the ruling class or elites who hinder the wellbeing of the people are viewed as homogenously bad.

Society. All political ideologies have their explanation of society. From the liberals’ view, for instance, society is made up of individuals who look after their self-interests. Conservatives, in contrast to liberals, believe that society is like a fabric of interdependent individuals. Populism is no different. In this ideology, society consists of two main groups: the people and the elites. Populism postulates that the two groups exist in an antagonistic manner in society. On one side are the people who wish to exercise their general will. On the other are the corrupt elites who act against the general will of the people. The populist’s main agenda, therefore, is to dismantle the elites so that the general will of the people may prevail.

Populists’ View of Governance. To comprehend the views of populists on what politics should be, one must understand the three core concepts in populism. These are the people, the elites, and the people’s general will. As earlier mentioned, the populists aim to ensure that the general will prevails. There are two ways to achieve this aim. First, the “evil” elites must be factored out. They are accused of betraying the people by no longer fulfilling the functions for which they were appointed (Laclau 176). Identifying these elites presents a challenge. In other ideologies such as conservatism and fascism, elites refer to the few individuals who constitute the ruling class. In populism, the term takes the same meaning. However, it extends to those holding leading positions in the media, arts, and the economy. Interestingly, there have been situations where the president of a nation complains about the elites. Therefore, elites in populism appear as shadowy forces that are almost mystical. Given that identifying the elites is a challenge, the second way is considered. This involves allowing people to exercise their will directly.

Populism supports that people ought to exercise their general will. It is worth noting that liberal democracy advocates for the same idea, at least theoretically. However, choosing representatives based on the majority vote presents a problem for populists. This is because such representatives are not always keen to identify and promote the general will of the people. Populists offer a solution to this. Instead of having a representative government, the people should be allowed to exercise their will directly through mechanisms such as referenda and plebiscites (Mudde and Kaltwasser 17). They refer to this as direct democracy.
Question Two: Populism and Fascism

In Europe and the US, it is common for populists to be cast in a negative light. The reason for this, as I see it, is the populists’ criticism of representative democracies and the establishment. This factor casts populism towards the right side of politics. Although populism borrows some aspects of fascism such as nationalism, the two ideologies also differ in their views of human nature, society, and politics.

Human Nature. Populists’ and fascists’ definitions of human nature are different. Fascists, on one hand, view humans as being who cannot be depended upon to think rationally. They insist that people are simply driven by passions in their actions. This is one of the points on which they criticize liberalism. Also, they use this argument as a basis for elitism. This is a concept that populism is heavily opposed to. According to fascists, elites are necessary to exercise rule over the people (Ball et al. 194). Populists, on the other hand, hold that people are capable of rational thinking and governing themselves collectively. In populism, elites are considered as corrupt and immoral. They work to advance their interests while suppressing the will of the people.

Society. The subject of society is mainly where comparison of populism and fascism begins. First, populism recognizes the society as made up of the people as a collective, rather than individuals. This appears similar to the dismissal of individualism by the fascists. However, I argue that this is not the case. The collectiveness of society in populism is aimed at advancing the common interests of the people. In this case, the people are defined as the sovereign, the common people, and the nation (Mudde and Kaltwasser 9). The collectiveness of people in fascism is aimed at advancing the interests of the state. In such a society, the interests of the people are not of importance. Instead, everybody is expected to sacrifice themselves and find fulfillment in advancing the nation’s agenda (Gentile 292). Unfortunately, such an agenda is dictated by one individual or a group of elites.

Another point of comparison is nationalism. It is a concept that is synonymous with fascism and not strange to populism. The definition of the people in populism is flexible. However, it is commonly used to refer to the native people of a country. For instance, one might talk about the people of Mexico or Brazil. In such a case, the term is used to refer to those who are native to such regions and who share a common life. Using the term in such a way reveals a similarity with fascists. For instance, Mussolini was motivated by nationalism to bring the nation of Italy together (Gentile 296). The problem with the concept of nationalism is that it assumes that a nation should comprise of a common people who share aspects such as ethnicity. This may lead to discrimination of minority groups.

Politics. Governance in populism differs from that in fascist regimes. The major difference stems from the fact that populists advocate for the general will of the people while fascists promote the interests of the state. Hence, in fascism, power is concentrated at the top in a totalitarian setting (Gentile 296). Populism instead aims to give all the power to the people. There are mechanisms through which the people are expected to exercise this power such as referendums. Such mechanisms are a taboo in a fascist’s government. In such nations, the people are expected to obey the elites without questioning (Gentile 304). Populism, on the other hand, advocates for doing away with elites.

Question Three: Populism and Liberal Democracy.

In this case, there are two contrasting arguments. One is that populism is a fundamental threat to liberal democracy. The other is that this ideology acts as a correction to liberalism. Such arguments call for a closer analysis of populism and liberalism to inform a sound discussion of their validity. To begin with, it is important to address the aspects of populism that are accused of threatening liberal democracy. One of these is the lack of individualism. Liberalism views every individual as having their self-interests (Ball et al. 48). Populism, instead, talks about common interests. It is almost as if all people are expected to speak in one voice. This notion is unacceptable to many liberalists. They see it as a threat to the few who might disagree with the generally accepted common interest of the people. Such minorities are likely to be sidelined. Another aspect that threatens liberal democracy is the dismissal of representative government. Liberalists believe that people ought to govern themselves. To manage these, they elect representatives based on one man one vote. People, therefore, govern themselves through these representatives. Populism, on the other hand, maintains that people are capable of governing themselves without representatives. This idea is viewed by many as a threat to liberal democracy.

The opposing group argues that populism is a correction of liberal democracy. It is no surprise that most populists are found in liberal democracies. The problem that populism aims to correct is that of the general will of the people not being advanced. They argue that liberal democracies are not responsive to some segments of the population sufficiently. This is either because of the corrupt nature of elites, or the incapacity of the leaders to see the general will of the people. Populists critique the representative government for treating people as passive beings who are only called upon to act during election time. To correct this situation, populists call for direct exercise of democracy through means such as referendums. This empowers groups that do not feel represented by the political establishment adequately. Consequently, populism promotes popular sovereignty.

Works Cited

Ball, Terence, Richard Dagger, and Daniel I. O’Neill. Political Ideologies and the Democratic Ideal. Taylor & Francis, 2016.

Gentile, Giovanni. “The Philosophic Basis of Fascism.” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1928, pp. 290-304.

Laclau, Ernesto. On Populist Reason. Verso, 2005.

Mudde, Cas, and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser. Populism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2017.

Youth Cultures

 

Question One

The best way to determine or define youth culture is by closely scrutinizing the youth. This includes studying their activities, passions, identity, and other aspects of their lives such as dressing. The film “The merchants of cool” narrates the lengths to which marketers will go to produce content that appeals to teens’ culture (Dretzin & Goodman, 2001). One such method was adopted by MTV. It included visiting teens’ homes to get first-hand information about their interests (Dretzin & Goodman, 2001). It, therefore, comes as no surprise that parents of teens are likely to be well informed about youth culture. Kupelian (2004) narrates how a journalist spent three years listening, observing, questioning, bonding, and winning the trust of eight teenagers in Reston, Va. It is through this scrutiny that she gained insight into the youth subculture. Understanding youth culture from the older generation’s perspective also requires close interactions. Through socializing and observing the youth, different generations develop their perspectives on what constitutes this culture. One might, therefore, question them to understand how their views on the youth’s way of life. For instance, Kupelian attempts to understand the youth by observing his 12-year-old son as he interacts with his peers (Kupelian 2004). These are effective ways to determine what constitutes youth culture.

Question Two

Different subcultures exist within the dominant youth culture. They have different ways of representing themselves. Heaven and Tubridy (2003) indicate that subcultures are typically anti-establishment and confrontational. Taylor and Taylor (2004) report that one of such subcultures, hip hop, is expressed through song, poetry, film, fashion, among other ways. Kupelian (2004) states how the subculture of rap was represented by fashion such as baggy t-shirts, oversized jeans, and sexual imagery. Some of these trends still exist to date. Therefore, it is evident that these subcultures have ways of representing themselves. These allow them to have an identity in the group. Identity serves an important role in subcultures as it defines the way a person understands themselves and their world (Heaven and Tubridy, 2003). For instance, graffitists identify with using art to express themselves. They mainly participate in drawing art on walls and other public places aimed at communicating a certain message. The “ravers” subculture is synonymous with Electronic Dance Music (EDM) events where youth meet and dance all night. They represent themselves as celebrators of Peace, Love, Unity, and Respect (PLUR). Furthermore, such events are characterized by heavy drug use. Another subculture is street gangs. These are groups of violent youth whose activities are illegal ranging from drug trafficking to robbery. Many youths in urban neighborhoods are attracted to street gangs due to the identity and ‘brotherhood’ or ‘sisterhood’ they offer. They represent themselves in ways such as tattoos or even wearing certain colors. Although every subculture has a way of representing themselves, others may represent them differently. In most cases, the other generations view youth subcultures as representing delinquents even in cases where such groups are harmless. Malone (2002) notes how the general public treats such groups with suspicion, intolerance, and moral censure.

Question Three 

With time, youth subcultures have co-opted their representations into mainstream practices. In most cases, this is done to gain the acceptance of the general public. By achieving this, such groups can freely carry out their activities without much suspicion. One of such groups is ravers. When this subculture started, groups used to meet in underground events. However, increased drug consumption in such gatherings was revealed through media scrutiny. This resulted in government crackdowns. Rather than end the subculture, the groups started meeting at formal places such as clubs and concerts. This move enabled them to gain acceptance. Graffitists have not been left behind. They were previously considered as vandals and faced a lot of crackdowns. However, many now use their art skills to communicate positive messages. This has earned graffiti art a place in mainstream practices.

Question Four

The space of youth culture is the area where they express their culture or subcultures. This cannot be defined as place-specific because youth culture is a way of life. Hence, it is practiced in different places such as home, school, or streets. Malone (2002), however, notes that young people favor the streets as a place of meeting and expressing their culture, subcultures, or even counter-cultures. However, acquiring such space is not always easy as their activities in the streets are misunderstood by adults. Additionally, curfews and move-on laws are imposed to prevent youth group meetings in the streets. Spaces are mainly classified into two: strongly classified spaces and weakly classified spaces. The former includes areas where only those who behave and belong are welcome. Such spaces including schools and churches do not encourage differences. Hence, youth culture is not facilitated. On the other hand, weakly classified areas have open boundaries with characteristics of social mixing and diversity. These include sporting venues, festivals, and carnivals (Malone, 2002). The youth have more freedom in such places compared to the strongly classified spaces. It is this kind of environment where youth culture thrives.

References

Dretzin, R. (Producer), & Goodman, B. (Director). (2001). The Merchants of Cool [Motion Picture]. United States: Frontline.

Heaven, C., & Tubridy, M. (2003). Global Youth Culture and Youth Identity. Highly Affected, Rarely Considered: The International Youth Parliament Commission’s Report on the Impacts of Globalization on Young People, 149-60.

Kupelian, D. (15 Jan. 2004). Selling Sex and Corruption to Your Kids. WND. Retrieved From https://www.wnd.com/2004/01/22764/

Malone, K. (2002). Street Life: Youth, Culture and Competing Uses of Public Space. Environment and Urbanization14(2), 157-168.

Taylor, C. S., & Taylor, V. (2004). Hip-hop and Youth Culture: Contemplations of an Emerging Cultural Phenomenon. Reclaiming Children and Youth12(4), 251.