I finished my highschool in Qatar, and a part of the program was an internship. Mine was at QFCHT, Qatar Foundation for Combating Human Trafficking.
It was just a bunch of houses in which maids who don’t have things going well with their Sponsors stay in, waiting for a ticket back home. The QFCHT would just host them and negotiate the sponsor for sending them home.
Like, a 2-floor 5-room or so house that has 10 maids living in it. Their passports are confiscated by their sponsors, who were often times irrational egoistic wretches who believe they’re superior (keep in mind that the sample at QFCHT was the set of maids with the worst sponsors, I’ve seen a lot of kind Qataris who were fair and respectable). I heard though that this sponsor system has changed a while ago, not sure how is it done now since I no longer live there, but hope it’s better.
We once, at our home, needed help cleaning so we called one of those Maid agencies for a temporary cleaning. They sent us a Filipino maid. While she was cleaning, she came across my little library that I had been growing during my ECE bachelors. She looked at the books and asked me if I am studying electronics. Started talking about her graduation project back home. She had graduated from ECE too..
I saw that with Nepali workers too. Many of them were highly educated, qualified, individuals, but I don’t know what financial situation compelled them to come to Qatar to work as waiters, maids, and other jobs that are way below their qualifications.
I tried to learn some phrases in their language to joke with them and cheer them up when I interact with them. It always felt odd being on the service-receiving side. A lot of them were resilient in keeping their smile and sanity in spite of the assholic treatment a specific class of customers. That class earned the “bakla” title.
There are a lot of factors but the ones I could think of right now are salary of engineering graduates here in Philippines are very low and culturally. Culturally in the sense that in provinces, some parents treat their kids as "investment". I paid your college tuition so when you graduate you should start paying back by buying us a house, car, phones, etc. So there's really that pressure to get a high paying job right away.
> Their passports are confiscated by their sponsors
How does this work? As an adult, if someone tries to take my passport I would refuse. If they snatched it out of my hands, I would take it back. If they somehow got the better of me and hid it or locked it up, I'd go to the police.
I could see maybe an abusive situation where going to the police isn't an option because the victim is locked in the house. In that case I'd expect that when the perpetrators are caught they'd be charged with kidnapping for that. And then some other charge (theft?) for locking up the passport.
Perhaps they have a family back home literally starving and it's a sacrifice at the time they think they're willing to take to feed their family and send money home. They're desperate and willing to let a lot of things happen you and I might not be.
They're also in another country that's highly male power oriented, probably talking to a male head of a household, potentially to someone wealthy and even powerful. Meanwhile you may be significantly smaller, may be female (this isn't meant as an insult... just that you may have less muscular mass/strength), and are in a country where someone may claim you stole your passport from their possession and they may literally cut your hands off, where the authorities may even agree with this should you go to them. Or, at the very least, they may no longer sponsor you and you may go home to your starving family with few other options. Some may argue that means the option you had was better, I think it's an argument to promote modern slavery and exploitation.
My situation and I suspect yours are not remotely the same to these folks. If someone snatched my passport, I'm a fairly good sized and a reasonably strong male to muscle myself in (I also have a concealed carry permit, so I have a weapon should I need it). I have several more explicit rights and resources at my disposal, I have a government that issued my passport that will look at it say it's clearly my passport. My stance in such a situation is significantly different, assuming it happened here in the US.
Meanwhile you have examples like Britney Griner who had similar advantages to me, arguably even more given her fame, and even she was detained and at the mercy of the Russian government where we literally had folks like Tony Blinken bartering a hostage exchange for her return. I'm not sure that would be the case if I was detained in Russia on similar charges (then again I probably wouldn't have been targeted as readily, either). The power dynamics in these situations aren't so dry cut but I assure you, these maids have very little power and rights. I recently had a layover in Qatar and even I was a bit weary of that--I tend to like to have layovers in more progressive countries where I'm less likely to deal with some abusive government.
I think you watched too many movies. In real life this even happens to people from the west working there. They need your passport to take a copy, and then it's gone. You're going to fight them then and there? Good luck with that, security and the cops won't be nice to you.
I once worked at a company where some had to go to Dubai to install one of our systems. Some of my more knowledgeable colleagues refused to go, and after hearing their stories, I would also never go.
It sounds like you're describing a movie plot set up to me. Any time I've given my passport to an official I received it back immediately. And you're saying the police are in on the scam? That's fiction as far as I'm concerned.
I guess that's my answer though. Things are just drastically different in some places and the authorities are on side to support the perpetrators rather than the victims.
18y ago I had to attend a meeting in an Italian city. The building had security and they asked us to give them our passports and that we'll get them back on our way out.
I was a bit confused, but as a junior developer I wasn't going to make a scene for that,.when apparently nobody from the group was blinking at the request (perhaps everybody was thinking the same?).
Luckily a senior manager from $bigcorp barged in and when asked to hand his password just confidently yelled "there is no fucking way I'm going to give you my passport" and walked through. We followed.
This is a society set up for this sort of thing. You are physically isolated both at the home level and the community level. There is nobody you can run to. It is a physical taking of your passport. Your desire to get it back or any words you might have in you don't change the fact that your passport is gone and you are isolated.
There is a "breaking" period for most of these workers where they are demoralized as well.
I used to live in a country with shitty police. An American I knew there reported several crimes. The officer would ask for his ID and when he opened his wallet the officer would extract his cash and send him on his way. Weirdly, he always believed it would be better next time, but this was actually the good level of service. The locals never went to the police because they knew to expect worse. The police in many countries serve only the powerful and themselves.
10's of thousands of cases (trafficking cases, not legal cases) and a handful of convictions of 'sponsors' show that the likelihood of coming out on top in such cases is very small.
It was only because of all the controversy over migrant workers rights during the prelude to FIFA World Cup in Qatar that holding your employees passports became illegal.
Before that, employers had the right to do so and it was (might still be) the norm.
Refusing to hand over your passport is like refusing to hand over your passport at immigration.
I think snatch is not the right term, but an agreement between employer and employee that former gets to keep the passport in the duration of the employment. This is illegal but the host country I think just doesn't impose this law or the employee is scared to report to authorities since they are oblivious or ignorant of the said law. Mainly they just want to get a job, get paid regardless.
i would imagine that if taking of passports is common knowledge by now, they'd just have a fake passport to give away and hide the real one. Then they can leave when they got their money from their job, or sees a better opportunity and have the ability to move.
I had actually bought Mod’s book, and she’s absolutely one of the best authors in the field. She takes the notions of giants like Moshe Haviv and Gallagher and translate it in a way that is super intuitive and simple. She’s one of my role models in academia. Pass her my greetings. I intend to teach a course based on her textbook after I’m done with my PhD (but mostly IEEE articles here, so not real science like ACM’s SIGs. Wish my PhD was in the awesome topics you guys are working on. I see the papers of Mor’s and Ziv Scully and the whole lab, really awesome work! Kudos to you guys. I won’t hide my envy of having Mor as a supervisor :D)
Well, the Arabic version of that same Wikipedia article provides the Hadeeth transmitter’s analysis of the Hadith regarding Al-‘Asmaa bint Marian, and the verdict that this hadeeth is fabricated (Mawdoo’). It simply isn’t true.
Moreover, the language of the claimed poet - I’m an Arab - is far different from the language of the time, far from being poetic, and the statement claimed that Prophet Muhammad said has a very different tone from his usual tone (He said “Who’d save me from Al ‘Asmaa bint Marwan?” and the Prophet himself mentioned that there is no savior other than Allah. The prophet approach would be something like يريحني (v. make me relaxed) from so and so. It’s a very horrible and easy to spot fabrication, the fabricator almost didn’t put any effort in it and used the language of his time instead.
You don’t need to mention a fabricated story to attack Islam’s take on free speech. Free speech is simply not a principle that was ever well-regarded in Islam. “Whomever believes in Allah and the last day should only say good or be quiet” and “Are people thrown into the depth of hellfire except by the sowing of their tongues” and “It is enough for one to be described as a liar is to talk about everything he heard”. The notion of “freedom” is a very western notion that - in its current form - very alien to the sort of freedom that Islam talks about: minimal freedom that is constrained by rules. Free speech certainly isn’t regarded as part of that minimal freedom. More like “constrained speech”, because of the inherent Islamic belief that free speech brings chaos. In times of Fitnah (tribulation, calamity) people are commanded by the Prophet not to speak a word: “Hold your tongue, stay at your home, and abandon the matters of public”; which is absolutely against free speech because people’s opinions are stirred most when there are events, and they’re commanded to be quiet and bottle it in.
It is just that we, Arabs, are a radically different culture that values stability and tradition. Something of the sort of “People should mind their own business”. Free speech undermines both. It’s a significant cultural difference that the west has no intent to respect, because they regard it as oppressive.
You don’t need to mention a fabricated story to highlight that.
"It is just that we, Arabs, are a radically different culture that values stability and tradition. Something of the sort of “People should mind their own business”. Free speech undermines both. It’s a significant cultural difference that the west has no intent to respect, because they regard it as oppressive."
This is an interesting remark that gave me some new insight into Arabic culture.
That said, free speech wasn't a value in much of the West either, much less in places like Taiwan that are now democratic. Most of Europe was pretty conservative in the 19th century and the revolutionaries who fought for liberal values were mostly educated city folk, a smallish class.
The value of free speech is in the fact that it prevents the country from committing some serious mistakes, or at least reduces chances thereof. Authoritarian systems look awesome from the outside, while democracies with their free speech are obviously messy and chaotic. But in the long run, authoritarian systems tend to commit fatal mistakes like going into an all-out war that they lose (it is happening right in front of us in Ukraine), because no one dared defy the Emperor.
The stability of yesteryear is now gone. With the Internet, any idea can reach any audience in milliseconds, and Arab societies, like those conservative European societies earlier, will have to live with the inherent chaos. IDK what is means for the future of Islam; Christianity in Europe has already collapsed or is (demographically) collapsing. Even in former strongholds like Poland, the majority of young people are no longer religious and this trend, once it sets in, has proven almost impossible to reverse.
I noticed the same trend among youngsters in Turkey, though Turkey isn't an Arab country; but it is an important trendsetter in the Islamic world.
Free speech is necessity for democracy. Democracy is necessity for the movement of enlightenment and justice. Enlightenment and science based governance led to the technology revolution, medical understanding and productivity boost.
Authorian societies will never be as productive productive and never be good source of innovation. If people wish to live according to tradition, conservatism and authorian rule it is ok, but it is unlikely they will ever catch Western democracies in quality of life.
We don't just have democracy vs. authoritarianism in a vaccuum, we have specific countries adopting specific ideologies with specific material starting conditions.
The UK used to be a massive colonial power that grabbed the world like it were an ice-cream cone, now they can barely respond to domestic crises. Yet they have become less authoritarian and conservative during the timeframe of their downfall. Currently, China has significant problems that could kill their future but they are currently demonstrating great innovation and scientific output. They have their own space station, are developing their own supply chains, have massive and ambitious infrastructure, TikTok is beating the Americans at their own game, and so on. Meanwhile, they have not seen a decrease in authoritarianism.
In fact, the current trend seems to illustrate that as economic growth stalls in the West, the population is turning to more authoritarian leaders. Perhaps our freedom was just a side-effect of fair weather, and we'll revert back once material conditions decrease?
Is this true for the UK proper? (Not the colonies, including Ireland.) Britain used to be quite a "lean state" domestically, while now being famous for having a lot of onerous laws micromanaging everything.
"now they can barely respond to domestic crises"
Interestingly, that was the case in the colonial era as well. Domestic problems in the UK were harder to address than wars on foreign continents. The Irish question was particularly stubborn. In 1914, shortly before the outbreak of WWI, there was actually a real risk of a civil war in Northern Ireland.
That is true. The speed of how thought transmits and how notions are, for a lack of a better word, globalized is a great challenge for cultures that emphasize tradition. There is a passive agent in the dissolution of traditional cultures by means of “globalization”.
Language, size, politics (especially the more polarizing they are) and the availability of resources (labor, land, capital and the like) has a big impact on which “traditionalist culture” is a big part of what dictates the active agents of that transformation. Biden’s administration aimed at being an active agent (E.g., statements to make Saudi Arabia a pariah) but the circumstances are not allowing that at the moment. The Saudis are aware of this intention of active intervention, which is why they emphasized the notion of “Arabs are a different people from the west” during Biden’s visit.
Being conservative (in the actual sense, not the political connotation) in the presence of the internet and the huge mass of consumable media - that is biased from a conservative perspective - is a challenge indeed.
Turkey seems to be embracing the inherent chaos easily, and I suppose that’s due to the presence of some Sufism that allows a great deal of tolerance (although, as an Arab Salafi so-called Wahhabi, that tolerance comes with a great deal of blasphemy, like worshipping by Mawlawi dancing, Rumi’s and Ibn Arabia’s spiritual pantheistic Wujood notion). That makes it similar that’s akin to Buddhism in how easy for it to spread. I heard of a Turkish Dervish creating some sort of a “Western Sufi Order” where dance moves are taught. But again, I’m not Turkish so my perception might be incorrect or misinformed. Would be interested to learn more!
I think that is a willful misrepresentation. "God is the light of the heavens and the earth". Possibly I can make pantheism out of that Quranic statement asserting truth.
Ibn Arabi's reading of Qur'an was exceptionally subtle. Do you know what he got out of that very familiar story of Abraham and his son to sacrifice? "You have believed the dream/vision" (37:105) His take on this sign completely floored me. He was reading at an entirely different level. A superior level, imho. Comparing what is generally understood from this story of Abraham (in 'orthodox' Judaism, Christianity and Islam) to what Ibn Arabi says it means, really highlights the difference between the legalistic and mystic approach to religion. But yes, Prophet did indeed choose 'milk' over 'water' and 'wine'. There is that. And Jesus chose water but showed how at the end during 'celebration of wedding' it turns into 'wine'. So some of us go straight for the 'wine'. It is unorthodox, but "blasphemy" is a matter for a specific Authority to determine. I personally think this is the root problem in the Umma ..
> [T]here is a passive agent in the dissolution of traditional cultures by means of “globalization”.
I agree with this and used to worry about it too, but there is (at least in my analysis) an element of 'conspiracy to social engineer the planet' involved. Further, can mankind even be made homogeneous, and, is a homogeneous mankind the inevitable end result of globalization?
Consider: "O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you." (49:13)
So the verse concludes, as you probably know!, with "Indeed, Allah is All-Knowing, Fully-Informed".
It's funny. I was watching the other day a very amusing clip (on yt) of an interview of Stephen King on when he first met Stanley Kubrick (in course of making The Shining). And it starts off with King retelling how he got a call in the morning and it was Kubrick, and Kubrick starts off with "I think horror stories are ultimately rather optimistic". King asks, why? Kubrick says ~, because it implies an existence beyond our mortal life, and that's optimistic! King replies, but what about hell? (lol) And Kubrick says, I don't believe in hell. :)
Point being I feel optimistic that given that Allah is All-Knowing and Fully-Informed, then obviously it will end in sunshine, this "peoples and tribes" that God apparently wants to intermingle and get to "know one another".
/& Salaam
p.s. "know one another" seems to put some pressure on "traditional culture", don't you think? Change does occur after acquisition of knowledge, don't you agree?
Tolerance for free speech that’s disruptive to social harmony and order is a distinctively western thing. East Asians aren’t big fans either. Which is fine. We don’t all need to be the same.
That’s ridiculous. I hope you experience the other side of the coin, where you are contrary to social harmony, perhaps because of your race, romance, gender, class, etc. Just because evil is widespread doesn’t normalize it and make it ok. There are even lots of protests in China, but the dictatorships have always limited their spread, more so today.
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.
Edit: it looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. We ban accounts that do that, regardless of what they're battling for, so please stop doing that.
As US is becoming less Europeanized, less Anglo, less liberal, through the large scale population replacement, you yourself will get to experience what it’s like to live in a society that values the liberal values much less than the people who founded and built this country.
Liberal values developed over time in course of which many tears were shed and much blood was spilled. In Europe and also here. [In other words, not 'innate' to the Europeans.]
I think your prognosis (which comes across as fear actually) may come to pass, but it will not be because US population is no longer primarily of European stock (some word!)
The primary driver has always been and remains culture. And culture in our age is an industry. And industry is subject to law & market. Liberal values are eroded because of the cultural content that undermine its validity and appeal. Non-Europeans will respond, I assure you, just as readily to formative cultural forces that engender an appreciation for liberal values, as do their "Anglo" fellow citizens. Likewise, both Anglos and the rest of us will also respond accordingly to cultural forces that are otherwise.
>Nowadays, lineage isn’t something that matters much.
they call it "caste" in indian subcontinent and unlike what the indian hindu ideology is around their caste system, everyone assumes that islamic lineage taking is same as hindu caste division which is not it.
> Hinduism started with "a great war". Buddhism started with a war.
This is an interesting take on Hinduism and Buddhism. I am assuming you are referring to Great Wars of Ramayana and Mahabharata. Everyone participating in those was were the followers of Sanatan Dharma which is known as Hinduism today. Both wars weren't fought of religious ground. Buddhism started with Siddhartha noticing dukkha (pain) of life and leaving home to find solution.
I’ve been using the catechism in everything I write throughout my PhD. It’s real a catechism for academia, it’s all about answering these questions in one way or another.
I just start with it and start adding bullet points to answer these questions, then I put more bullet points and expand in them, and so on until I have enough material. Then I map it to each section of w/e document I am writing.
It’s been one of the most useful things in I’ve ever learnt about. Came to learn about it from an IEEE webinar by a professor of power systems (Siddharth Suryanarayanan) that I stumbled upon via vEvents when COVID-19 lockdowns started. I presented a copy of it to my lab in my PhD, helped my lab-mates clarify things to their supervisor and write. It was super effective.
