Obviously a big difference is that the US currently has a secular and liberal majority, while these Islamic countries have never had that. The Arab modernizers were a small elite. Even when the US had a conservative majority by today's standards, that majority was never close to being as conservative as most Muslim countries, because as you say, Muslims had and still have a tradition of idealizing female seclusion and gender segregation, while Westerners have never had such a tradition in modern times.
That progressive legislation causes backlash is not unexpected, but the difference between the US and Muslim countries is that in the US this backlash has been overcome. You can look at polls, and see how US public opinion has gradually become more progressive over the decades, despite momentary setbacks. Today in the US, many Republicans have to pretend not to be in favor of abortion bans in order not to suffer electoral losses, and other social changes have been even more radical.
The question then is, why do liberal elites succeed in the West but not in the Muslim world? It probably has something to do with WEIRD populations being predisposed to think differently about individuals and their communal obligations. Perhaps interesting is to see where liberal elites are succeeding outside of the West, in places like East Asia and Latin America, and perhaps the answer to that is that these places are just Westernized or Western influenced.
"Gun control relaxation" - you coded this as a progressive reform of the 60s or 70s. And one that caused a backlash.
What are you trying to suggest happened, how was it perceived as progressive, and who was reacting against it?
Was it: a) were being made *easier to obtain* by all? -which is what relaxation sounds like, and although in 21st century America, this is a right-wing, conservative coded position, in the 60s-70s it was left-wing?
b) Guns were made harder obtain by all? And this was immediately considered a left-wing position, and immediately opposed by right-wing backlash (as in the 21st century)
c) States set up a more uniform standard for *all citizens* to obtain guns, white *and* black, male *and* female, old *and* young? This was considered a progressive reform at the time and a previous, more blatantly discriminatory system allowing guns freely to "members of society in good standing" - white, non-dissident men, and keeping them out of the hands of "the wrong kind of people" - non-whites, the young, women, dissidents, was preferred by traditionalists so they did not like reforms?
Obviously a big difference is that the US currently has a secular and liberal majority, while these Islamic countries have never had that. The Arab modernizers were a small elite. Even when the US had a conservative majority by today's standards, that majority was never close to being as conservative as most Muslim countries, because as you say, Muslims had and still have a tradition of idealizing female seclusion and gender segregation, while Westerners have never had such a tradition in modern times.
That progressive legislation causes backlash is not unexpected, but the difference between the US and Muslim countries is that in the US this backlash has been overcome. You can look at polls, and see how US public opinion has gradually become more progressive over the decades, despite momentary setbacks. Today in the US, many Republicans have to pretend not to be in favor of abortion bans in order not to suffer electoral losses, and other social changes have been even more radical.
The question then is, why do liberal elites succeed in the West but not in the Muslim world? It probably has something to do with WEIRD populations being predisposed to think differently about individuals and their communal obligations. Perhaps interesting is to see where liberal elites are succeeding outside of the West, in places like East Asia and Latin America, and perhaps the answer to that is that these places are just Westernized or Western influenced.
"Gun control relaxation" - you coded this as a progressive reform of the 60s or 70s. And one that caused a backlash.
What are you trying to suggest happened, how was it perceived as progressive, and who was reacting against it?
Was it: a) were being made *easier to obtain* by all? -which is what relaxation sounds like, and although in 21st century America, this is a right-wing, conservative coded position, in the 60s-70s it was left-wing?
b) Guns were made harder obtain by all? And this was immediately considered a left-wing position, and immediately opposed by right-wing backlash (as in the 21st century)
c) States set up a more uniform standard for *all citizens* to obtain guns, white *and* black, male *and* female, old *and* young? This was considered a progressive reform at the time and a previous, more blatantly discriminatory system allowing guns freely to "members of society in good standing" - white, non-dissident men, and keeping them out of the hands of "the wrong kind of people" - non-whites, the young, women, dissidents, was preferred by traditionalists so they did not like reforms?
Good point. I have rephrased. All those laws triggered backlash. The others were progressive. You can read the original paper