Matt Raimondo, Blog #6

Change can be a difficult transition, especially for cultures or groups that continually feel marginalized by the world around them.  People themselves are generally inclined to desire being attached or a part of something bigger than himself/herself; being with a group of other individuals can serve this purpose.    Some people may even force others to adhere to a certain group's ideology or rules in order to prevent marginalization of the dominant party.  Anderson touches on many historical examples of this throughout chapter 6 of Imagined Communities, such as the English attempting to convert Indians to Anglicanism, the Japanese influencing Koreans and Slovaks being "Magyarized".  Anderson points to the concept that these Empires- such as the English -were inherently resistant to any foreign rule or influence.  In order to prevent being ruled by others, these Empires established colonies to exert their own rule over these newly acquired subjects; this ultimately led to Imperialism prior to the 20th century.  This trend boiled down to effectively stating, "rule over others, or be ruled yourself".  Instead of practicing Imperialism as an anticipatory action against being marginalized, these Empires moved to influence all those around them, and to effectively influence the entire world as a result.

That being said, there are modern day examples of groups practicing preventive strategies to avoid marginalization from the 21st century world.  When looking at the current conflict in Egypt, especially between the ruling Muslim Brotherhood and other Egyptian interest groups, I believe that we can see anticipatory strategies being utilized to prevent the Brotherhood's marginalization within their own borders.  For example, as many in Egypt are showing resistance to the Brotherhood's seizure of more and more power, the Muslim Brotherhood has called for ancient Egyptian monuments to be destroyed due to their pagan origins.  Relics like the pyramids and the Sphinx would be destroyed because they deviate from Islam being the one true religion in Egypt; this move would seemingly unite fundamentalist muslims within Egypt as well as appeal to the fundamentalist community throughout the Middle East, such as Hamas and Iran.  This move would effectively seek to unite the Brotherhood's sympathizers within Egypt while also appealing to the greater community across borders, preventing other sympathizers from marginalizing Egypt's Brotherhood in the process.

I feel that this example reflects this week's topic about avoiding marginalization from the nationally-imagined community.  Throughout the world, both everyday muslims and others are rejecting the practices of fundamentalist Islam, and even countries like Iran have seen protests against such fanatical perversions to the Islamic faith.  The Muslim Brotherhood still has a dominant position in Egypt and in other states; radical Islam arguably is still a force in the North African and Middle East regions.  This move is meant to try and resist these forces, both internally and externally.  I feel that this is a move to try and avoid marginalization, maybe not from the perspective of a globally dominant force seeking to resist marginalization, but rather from a regional force resisting the forces of the world around them.