Self-criticism is an important factor in maintaining and developing our communities and cultures. I have written so much about self-criticism that I receive criticism from others who say that I whip myself and neglect other serious problems in favor of criticism.
I can’t disagree with some people’s analysis that I am whipping myself. Whoever insists on doing the right thing and says that others are wrong will select from events to prove that the self is a peaceful virtuous identity. In their opinion, others are mere occupiers and the reasons for calamities. Such people never give up praising themselves and abusing others.
Everytime I engage in a critical analysis of our communities and cultures, reviewing the crisis from the inside, considering it to be the core and the key of all problems, I am stunned by the comments I receive. Some ask to question others and blame outsiders for our catastrophes, implying that criticism is forbidden. Some believe that self-criticism means acquitting others when that is not the case. Everyone has his own analysis. Some of us are used to the old type of thinking that acquits “the self” and blames “others” who live with an anesthetized conscience. It is a temporary relief under all circumstances.
In spite of that, the majority agrees that self-criticism is an essential element to community development. Therefore, where is the problem since there is such agreement? In my evaluation, the problem could be split into two: The first is that the agreement is theoretical for some people. The second is that the majority of those who practice or apply self-criticism inside our communities demand that all levels of society do so — except the one they belong to, whether tribal, cultural, professional or whatever.
People who theoretically approve of the importance of self-criticism don’t implement it in reality because the openly diagnosing process requires treatment. However, treatment requires change and development and this is a result that some fear. It is a fear of what is new in the middle of a crazy world that has so little peace. Since everything new has not been tried and tested, it seems more dangerous than the old. Regardless of the fact that the old is an admitted failure, they still fear that what is new could be much worse.
What to do? There must be determination to educate people because if we don’t change, change will come, whether we like it or not. If we don’t save ourselves, the crisis will grow just like what’s happening in the Arab world at the moment. If we limit our mission to criticize others and ask them to criticize themselves and apologize for us, then that is the recipe for making enemies.
Moving on to the second group that accepts self-criticism and implements it within Arab communities, it is a group of people who criticize everyone and everything except themselves. A group against other groups or a party against other parties — and it is the same at all different levels — managers against employees and vice-versa, students against teachers and vice-versa, women against men, young against old and tradition against modernization.
The critic here plays the role of the audience considering himself beyond the critical process. He is most likely to be a viewer watching the game in the field, criticizing this and complimenting that without having anything to do with what is going on either positively or negatively. Yet within the context of criticism on both social and civilized levels, the critic must see things as a mirror that reflects the society individually and in groups and not only enjoy the outside scenery. He is in the end an individual belonging to this society and part of it one way or the other.
The crucial events happening in the Arab world make us run away from believing that we make our own reality. So we try to imagine an outside scene that is far away and to which closed communities contribute — basically living in the world of illusions.
What shall we do in this case? In my opinion, the best way to deny illusions is to adopt the method of dictatorial suspicions. I must suspect my beliefs and question them until I prove them right. And try not to use traditional ways that my beliefs are invariable until proven wrong, because in this case you will never prove them wrong as long as you started with it as an invariable absolute reality or truth.
In other words, I must start by self-criticism, directed at my group, my methods, my thinking, my practices and myself and then collect all criticisms and accusations stated against us and analyze them according to subjective unbiased impartial methodology. Although unbiased imperialism is a proportional issue, other than that we won’t be able to get out of the illusions and overstate ourselves and accuse others.
