We need to talk about Saudi Arabia
architectsjournal.co.ukHow many democratic countries have never had some kind of involvement in imperialism, slavery, monarchy, starting wars, etc? How many are still doing it?
I don’t really think that individuals need to feel especially bad for getting work where there’s work.
Some jobs just inherently involve asshole clients. If your job is to stitch the leather interiors for Rolls Royce, 100% of your customers are assholes. I don’t think that means you should stop doing that job and flip burgers instead.
Hugged to death, use https://archive.is/1JT24 instead
Works where archive.is is blocked, no CAPTCHA, no Javascript required, no https://top-fwz1.mail.ru/js/code.js, no Google Analytics cookie:
https://web.archive.org/web/20241216122438if_/https://www.ar...
It's my belief that architects such as our author have far too much free time on their hands.
No you don’t. Just mind your own business. Leave them alone and hope they do the same.
> Leave them alone
Well, this is what the article proposes to architects indeed.
Yes he does. Helping an authoritarian regime known for oppression and killing its dissidents is not ethical.
And sure as hell we would not mind our business, standing aside when evil is being done makes you participate in evil. Saudi Arabia needs to be named and shamed and boycotted, the same way Russia and Israel currently are.
What would a boycott against Saudi Arabia actually accomplish?
The quickest path to a Saudi Arabia that doesn't abuse human rights is probably the path they're already on.
Perhaps this is true. But history is also littered with leaders that want to do The Right Thing, but end up entrapped in the power dynamics of the system. The more authoritarian a regime the more it resembles a game of thrones.
Leaders like Assad and Kim Jung Un promised reforms but ended up ruling much like their fathers before them. People are quick to dismiss such early promises as Machiavellian posing but I believe the issues are more systemic. They end up as authoritarians because thats the only way for them and their kin to remain safe in the face of opposition. The ruling elites are comfortable in their local optimum and moving out of it will be politically chaotic. The status quo for them is the least worst choice.
I would not be too quick in expecting change from these regimes is I guess what I'm trying to say. They're not always as firmly established as they might seem.
This video by CJP Grey explains this dynamic very well, for anyone interested.
That's fair. As a foreigner, it's hard to determine how much has improved in Saudi Arabia. The improvement might be less marked than the impression I've gotten from the outside.
What will ignoring climate change actually accomplish?
There is "Not my problem" here, because one or way another it will be your problem within ten years, maybe five.
And for some people here and reading this, within a few months.
Your choices about what to work now on affect your future, in a very direct, literal, potentially fatal way.
That's the point.
If your job is to design buildings, choosing which country to design it for will have no effect on climate change.
A building is a building. If you’re pouring concrete you’re impacting the climate.
This is like saying you’d rather build automobiles in the US instead of China. Either way you’re building an automobile.
The ideology of the government has very little to do with whether the thing you’re doing is impacting climate change.
Architects who want to reduce carbon emissions need to switch professions entirely.
MBS already wants to modernize and liberalize Saudi Arabia. This is for economic reasons, and, I would guess, also because his macabre reputation is a drag when he's partying with his Western friends.
Any boycott that would get Saudi Arabia more humane government would be a good boycott. It just seems more likely that sanctions would wreck their economy and lead to a religious fanatic taking over.
No, he does want to turn saudi arabia into a secular democracy. He is just doing the bare minimal in order to gain legitimacy and investments/business. He is not a believer in human rights, democracy and religious freedom. He is literally a dictator and a murder.
He doesn't need to. Saudi Arabia doesn't give citizenship to foreigners. We don't want permanent foreigner migration like Japan and South Korea and other countries. 99% of the population is already Muslim. All foreigners are temporary workers on 1 year visas. They're just in KSA for doing their jobs. Their views never mattered in the past, now and will never matter in the future. They do their job contract and they leave. Lol what's so amazing about democracy. Look at America. Democracy means income taxes, giving citizenship to foreigners, bringing third world shithole refugee criminals, junkies and crap, having your government policies change way too much often, giving precedence to foreigners for jobs. No thanks! Saudi Arabia has a good small growing population of 20 million Saudi citizens. It's close knit, homogeneous, same religion, culture etc. Monarchy provides us all the benefits we need. Look at Kuwait, it tried having a partial democracy and fails miserably.
Yea, you guys having slaves without citizenships is so innovative. You really are so smart for making sure your slaves dont have any rights.
Mohammed bin Salman? He is probably a complex man, but by accident of history the only thing we know about him is the killing of Khashoggi and the gnarly details of the body disposal process.
That's the one, unfortunately.
In Saudi Arabia, if you're not someone he wants to torture or kill, you can enjoy increased religious freedoms, gender equality, and international ties.
It's a bit like Iran before the revolution: the Shah was liberalizing and modernizing his nation, while at the same using SAVAK to torture his opposition.
> In Saudi Arabia, if you're not someone he wants to torture or kill, you can enjoy increased religious freedoms, gender equality, and international ties.
Increased compared to taliban rule? Wow, thanks so much to the benevolent dictator for allowing a woman to go out without a male companion without being stoned. And thank the benevolent dictator for not having an interest in me specially. All praise the guy who could dismember many people but chooses to do that only to a couple, and who could imprison many, but does it mostly to his family and whoever he pleases.
If there were an overwhelming majority in Saudi Arabia who demanded the full set of human rights we have in the West, then it would be unconscionable to say anything positive about Mohammed bin Salman.
This quote is from a story from before Saudi women got the right to drive. The piece argues it was a common take:
https://theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/02/saudi-prot...Mashaal El-Maliki, a housewife: "Female driving will destroy family life because it will give husbands a chance to know other women who (as drivers) will be free and without guardians."The best path forward is whatever path is the shortest to making life bearable for liberal Saudis, but that doesn't end in conservative revolt (and deeper theocracy). When a considerable portion of a nation opposes basic freedoms, there are fewer viable options.
>the Shah was liberalizing and modernizing his nation
Quaint revisionism; in fact Mossadegh was already actually liberalizing and modernizing the nation while Pahlavi was turning it into a US/UK client state.
Neither Mossadegh nor Pahlavi were ideal leaders, and both were better than what Iran has today.
No leaders are 'ideal', but the only way you can equivocate between these two is taking it making a tacit assumption that reorienting the state apparatus and your economy towards the needs of foreign clients - and away from the enrichment of regular people at home - is good.
The concern I raise is that religious fanatics replace MBS. In that context, the relevant Iranian comparison is pre-1979 and post-1979. Post-1979 is a nightmare, a terrifying Twilight Zone episode. See:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Iran
In Saudi Arabia, MBS is probably better than a more fanatical Wahabist government. I gather the power struggle between the royals and the clerics is ongoing. Human rights progress would reverse under the latter.
Why? Is this the new version of the WMB?
Cause chopping journalists into pieces is evil, same as attacking your political enemies like what all the douche dictators like MBS, Trump, Putin, Stalin, Netanyahu and many other evil people do.
We are calling this out. What is wrong with that?