Keith,
My impression has been that in the past, the Saudis have provided much, or
all, of the living costs for their people from oil revenue. Now, it has
changed, and their welfare state is not so nearly accommodating. This may
be why the mob is mumbling.
If this is so, why?
Maybe their oil revenues are down - but can't imagine that.
Are the thousands of princes salting away more in the land of cuckoo clocks
and chocolate?
Any thoughts?
Harry
----------------------------------------------------------------
Keith wrote:
>Hi Lawry,
>
>On this bright and sunny morning I'll return to the tail-end of your
>posting (without re-naming the thread this time!) because it contains a
>couple of very important points.
>
>1.
>According to Prof Bernard Lewis ("What went wrong?"), the principal enemy
>of fundamentalist Islam in most countries is *not* other religions,
>zionism, communism or even western imperialism(!) but secularism itself and
>its associated schools and universities. I found this difficult to believe,
>but thinking about the direction in which fundamentalist Christianity
>appears to be rapidly heading in western countries (with its denial of
>scientific facts in biology, for example) then I won't argue with one of
>the world's authorities on Islam.
>
>Wahhabism must therefore share considerable blame for the economic decline
>of Saudi Arabia in that its type of religious education, which dominates
>the vast majority of schools (except presumably of the private schools for
>the rich in Riyadh) excludes any form of practical education and, in fact,
>produces a state of mind quite early in a boy's life that causes him to
>abjure any sort of technical education even if it were available later.
>(Therefore all work in private non-oil industry and the retail trade is
>carried out by foreignors.) I've mentioned that only 2% of graduates
>(themselves a minority of the youth population) are qualified in
>engineering and suchlike. Presumably, this has been "allowed" in a sort of
>unconscious manner (by the Wahhibist clerics) in order to produce just
>enough technically trained Saudis who can supervise their oil industry.
>
>2.
>The second important point is that, as you say, all Saudi men (and in
>several other oil-rich Gulf states) don't need to work because they receive
>an income, health services, etc. from the state. This complete dependency
>on the state, negating the need for practical education and the faintest
>spark of enterprise, is now a great danger for these countries. It is a
>"pure" example of what happens when the welfare state is predominant. In
>effect, it is crippling the culture of any such country for at least a
>couple of generations to come, even if radical reform were to start taking
>place immediately.
>
>(I am not against the idea of the welfare state in principle in the west.
>It's a matter of where to draw the line. It is quite clear in all western
>countries that the verdict of the last century [from the political left and
>right] is that the welfare state has proceeded too far, and that it now
>needs to recede somewhat if sufficient enterprise [for economic renewal]
>and self-responsibility [for lower crime rates] are to be maintained.)
>
>Keith
>
>(LdB)
><<<<
>Generally, the oil-rich countries -- and not just the Arab ones -- have
>tended to become dependent on foreign labor, manual and professional. Oil
>revenue money is distributed freely, in effect, to nationals of the country,
>and they do not have to do any work. So the nationals become dependent on
>the foriegn workers, and fail to develop as a work force of their own. This
>is the reality behind many of the symptoms you point to. This is a very hard
>nut to crack. Saudi over-spending has left them in debt, and so this pattern
>is being severely challenged -- and for simple economic reasons and not
>religious ones. Will Saudi Arabia and the others, find a way, despite their
>wealth, to evolve a competent diversified indigenous workforce? This is,
>IMHO, the number one issue before them. I did a detailed study (including a
>large public opinion survey) several years ago of this stuation in one such
>country (not SA) and was impressed by how hard it was going to be.
******************************
Harry Pollard
Henry George School of LA
Box 655
Tujunga CA 91042
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: (818) 352-4141
Fax: (818) 353-2242
*******************************
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/2/2002
