In Paul Silversteins essay, he delves into the concepts and contradictions of minority politics. His essay begins with a brief description of King Mohammed VI’s promulgation of a new Moroccan Constitution which identified Morocco as a secular state in which all ethnicities and religions are equal and protected by law. This new constitution which was intended to satisfy previous protests of social injustices still left many questions for Moroccans as to the true degree of secularism in the state. Paul Silverstein uses the term faustian bargain, an agreement in which a person sets a side their own spiritual or moral values in order to obtain wealth or other benefits. In principle, this seems clear enough. My question is however, can a state truly become autonomous of any religious influence. In the ethnographic references which Silverstein provides, there is still some religious leaning in each case. States the claim to be secular, such as the United States are in fact still partly governed by the religion. In the US, Protestant Christian values influence basic political decisions such as the legality of contraception and abortion as well as the aid of fellow citizens. It can hardly go without notice that a non-Christian person has never served as president of the United States. Morocco is heavily populated by Muslims and of course Islam is prominent within the government so can legislation be passed without leaning towards Islamic values. Can other minorities truly be represented?