Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:00 PM Nov 2015

"YOU THERE! Why do you hate Muslims?"

Last edited Fri Dec 4, 2015, 05:53 AM - Edit history (2)

"YOU THERE. Why do you hate Muslims?"

"I don't. I think Islam is a bad idea."

"Look. There are millions and millions of ordinary Muslims all over the world. They are lovely, kind, honest, decent people who hurt no-one. They have children and laugh and cry and dream and want to have an ordinary life like everyone else. Why do you hate them?"

"I don't hate them. I agree that Muslims are very nice people just like everyone else. I think Islam is a bad idea. I don't hate the people who believe in Islam, I think they believe the wrong things. I also think punishing Muslims in general for the actions of the radicalised followers of their religion would be utterly horrible."

"Don't you understand that bigotry is wrong?"

"Yes, I understand that perfectly."

"No, you only THINK that you do."

"No, I know that I do."

"Why do you hate Muslims?"

"I don't. I have gone out of my way to tell you exactly in plain English how I feel about Muslims, and that I am able to distinguish between Muslims and Islam as entities in the Universe and why they should be thought about as separate things. I think the person who is having difficulty separating them is not me, but you."

"I'm not talking about Islam, I'm talking about MUSLIMS? Why do you hate Muslims?"

"I don't hate Muslims. I disagree with Islam. Whenever I say 'Islam', you seem to hear 'Muslims'. The words are different and refer to different things. That, in fact, is the reason we have different words for the two things, to make it a simple matter to distinguish between them. I am quite careful to use the appropriate nouns when I relate my thoughts to people, specifically to avoid the confusion you are accusing me of and make it very clear to them that I already understand the difference between Muslims and Islam."

"Look. Muslims are in danger. People are bigoted against them. You are one of these bigots, you just don't realise it. You are saying you hate Islam but really I think you have to admit it, don't you? This is just racism. You hate Muslims."

"No, I don't hate Muslims. The reason I am able to say this to you in the hope that you will accept what I say in good faith is because I partake of that fundamentally human characteristic that I share with both them and you - a subjective experience of my own cognition. This means that When I Think Things, I am able to report to you directly the results of my thinking. You don't have to work it out, I can actually just tell you. And what I'm telling you is that Muslims and Islam are different things and can be thought about as different things by virtue of the fact that Muslims are living organisms and Islam is a cluster of concepts. Having been alive and capable of interacting with other ordinary human beings all over the planet for some years now, I have arrived at the conclusion that human beings and abstract concepts are separable all by myself and understand that it is in fact possible to make judgements of a belief without supposing that someone holding that belief is in any sense inherently unwholesome or nasty or smelly or bad or ugly or scary or weird or describable with any other adjectives with negative overtones. It was not difficult for me to arrive at this conclusion as I myself have been wrong about some things, as have you, I strongly suspect, and understand that sometimes brains produce junk. It is the junk that I don't like, not the brains, nor the owners of those brains. I do not hate Muslims. In fact, I know many Muslims. I have no doubt that you will dismiss that as another example of the "Some of my best friends are...", argument, which dismissal would be the right thing to do if I was suggesting knowing them qualified me to ignore what they say, which is what the "Some of my best friends are" argument is actually wrong about, but in fact I am saying it to disabuse you of your unfounded assumption about me, to wit, that I hate Muslims."

"You just admitted it! You just said you hate Muslims!"

"Rather a lot was said by me before I arrived at that phrase, and said phrase could only be interpreted as an expression of actual hatred of Muslims by someone who had ignored every one of my preceding points."

"You do hate them. Subconsciously. That's why you said you hate Muslims. Why can't you see it?"

"Because there's nothing there to see. Only somebody who doesn't actually understand what the subconscious is could make your most recent assertion. Speech is a product of the conscious mind, not the subconscious mind. The subconscious mind does not have that power. Nor is it at all meaningful or true to suppose that the subconscious mind has the power to express hidden meanings in the produce of the conscious mind, particularly not if the plain structure of that produce explicitly contradicts that hidden meaning. If I say: "I don't know how anyone could hate gay people," you might suppose that I secretly hated gay people because my utterance contains the phrase 'hate gay people' but that would be ridiculous, wouldn't it? What we're seeing here instead is perpetual threat perception with the sensitivity turned all the way up to the max in service of a hero-complex."

"Your words are HARMING MUSLIMS."

"There is no harm coming to Muslims from my dislike of Islam. Harm coming to Muslims requires a generalised disinterest in separating people from their belief structures, which is not what I'm doing, and in cases where some imaginary nasty people listening to what I have said and deciding that it legitimises their own extant hatred of Muslims I am not responsible for the emotional charge around their perceptions of Muslims as their hatred is extant. They would be looking for excuses to hate them anyway just as you are looking for excuses to accuse me of hatred resembling theirs. There is nothing in what I have said that could cause hatred of Muslims, other than in the minds of people who want excuses to hate Muslims, which would not be my fault. Such increased danger is in fact far more likely to come from being freaked out by things getting blown up by Islamic terrorists. People who think symbolically rather than logically do not need my opinions to help them with their hatred. They're actually much more likely to ignore me completely, given that they will be able to tell that I don't hate Muslims through my having said so in ordinary words, thus alienating me from them. So if you think my statements are adding weight to the wrong side of an enormous, imaginary, collective, Human Opinion See-Saw on which one side is 'hate Muslims' and on the other is 'leave Muslims alone' I ask you to consider this idea - that you are thinking metaphorically instead of logically and you should learn to read what is said to you and absorb its meaning in plain English rather than reflexively and petulantly relating it exclusively to structures it reminds you of already within your own mind."

"This is just 'hate the sin, not the sinner' all over again!"

"Your capacity for wilful misunderstanding would win you an Olympic medal. The reason 'hate the sin, not the sinner' is a problem is because that position obscures the idea that the thing under discussion, that being gay people living their lives according to the ordinary processes emergent from their sexual orientation, is a 'sin', which it isn't. The 'argument' places the asserter of sin in a context where they don't actually have to discuss the nature of the 'sin' beacuse they have a special way of thinking about themselves as nice people and so can think what they like because they're nice. They maintain the idea that gay people living their lives according to their hearts and their nature is a 'sin' by putting themselves on a totally bogus 'secretly more tolerant than thou' pedestal which doesn't actually have anything to do with understanding homosexuality. This process has nothing at all to do with the fact that Islam has weird, creepy ideas or that Islam is criticisable without assuming Muslims are evil people. 'Hate the sin not the sinner' places the focus on the interlocutor's relationship with the 'sinner' and actually avoids discussing the 'sin'. 'Criticise Islam, Respect Muslims' places the focus on Islam, not Muslims and so in fact does the exact opposite thing of 'hate the sin, not the sinner'. 'Hate the sin not the sinner'' is senseless because it's ridiculous to suppose homosexuality is a sin. Also, the supposed separation between the 'sin' and the 'sinner' is utterly bogus as legislation is constantly brought into being around homosexuals not homosexual behaviour. 'Criticise Islam, Respect Muslims' treats Islam as a belief structure to be criticised, which is an entirely logical and reasonable thing. Sexual orientation is not a belief structure. There, I have had to go to considerable lengths to unpack that one, I can't wait for the next wildly inappropriate co-option of minority identity political analysis, go for it. Perhaps you might like to consider the possibility that comparing 'hate the sin, not the sinner' to attempts to separate Islam from Muslims is grotesquely offensive to gay people as gay people are regularly slaughtered as a result of Islam, incidentally, not that that seems to make much difference to people like you."

".......God damn you. Why do you hate Muslims?"

"I don't. I think Islam is a bad idea. I have already said this. I used the right nouns and everything. This is really annoying."

"Islam is a religion of peace."

"That is demonstrably false. Waste no more of our time on that idea, please. It is obviously a lie. Islam is no more a religion of peace than Christianity is or Communism or Capitalism are political structures of peace or cucumbers are vegetables of international dialling codes. The Koran in fact has various specifications regarding the appropriate conduct of warfare."

"You said something nasty about the Koran! You hate Muslims."

"No, I don't hate Muslims. I have said this to you repeatedly now. What I actually think is that Islam is a bad idea."

"But your mind is made of cheese and your vicious, sizzling, neurotic, twisted horror of Islam will morph psychologically into a seething hatred of its followers because you are secretly MAD."

"No, that's not really how my mind works. Actually, most people's minds don't work like that. In fact, the vast majority of ordinary human beings don't think like that at all. I think your model for understanding People Who Are Not You might be a bit strange. Perhaps you are using the utterly tiny number of hate crimes against Muslims as evidence of some widespread phenomenon akin to the foul loathing of Jewish people in the mid-20th century that led to their being rounded up and murdered during the Holocaust, which was a highly peculiar thing as no Jewish people had blown anything up or cut off anyone's heads or killed any gay people because of Judaism or decided women were inherently too decorative to be seen or untrustworthy behind the wheel of a motorised vehicle because of the Torah or anything like that. The current situation is dramatically different. There is a great deal of hatred against Muslims, but I do not partake of it, and that hatred is not emergent from a national fever dream but from what a number of Islamic terrorists have actually done. It is very regrettable but not particularly mad, under the circumstances. It is well within the normal range of human reaction."

"Listen to me. You have to understand something. Muslims are kind, decent people. They are friendly. They love their children. They are good. They must not be hurt by your Islamophobia."

"I'm not interested in Islamophobia. I have no interest in hurting or upsetting Muslims and my distrust of Islam is not a phobia. The things that concern me about Islam, which is a different thing from Muslims, are firstly that it features a broad-spectrum cloud, centred on a commonality of religious movements pursued under the banner of 'Islam', of weird, twisted, ugly ideas about women, gay people and people who aren't Muslims, which is antithetical to my own beliefs about women, gay people and people who aren't Muslims, and secondly, that it produces people who want to blow innocent people up with alarming frequency. I disagree with these ideas. I think they are wrong. That is why I have repeatedly attempted to explain to you that I already understand that Muslims and Islam are not the same thing and I am beginning to think you are here entirely to waste my time as you are obviously congenitally incapable of separating Islam from Muslims yourself."

"They're trying to blow us up because we bombed them."

"That doesn't work, does it? The Muslims who are attacking us very often don't even come from the areas we are bombing. It doesn't make any sense. Suppose you are a Christian. Would you place yourself in a suicide bombing vest and bomb innocent people because someone in a totally different country suicide-bombed a church in another totally different country? I would suspect not. There is a belief structure that seems to legitimise this kind of response, and not just in the minds of the people doing the suicide bombing but also in those seeking to protect those who share the suicide bombers religion, that belief structure is Islam. Are atheists Christianophobic? No. That's a very silly idea. Actually, I find the word 'Islamophobia' very strange indeed. If it was 'Muslimophobia' it would make for more sense. Conflating criticism of an idea with meaningless prejudice against its believers is exactly that, a conflation. Islam is a belief structure like any other and open to criticism and analysis like any other."

"Why do you hate Muslims?"

"I don't."

"Why don't you understand that you hate Muslims? You think you disagree with Islam but really you hate Muslims."

"I don't hate Muslims."

"Do you understand that your constant doubling down only re-affirms your deep and abiding hatred of Muslims?"

"I have no deep and abiding hatred of Muslims. I have explained this to you."

"Your hatred of Muslims is so deep, so evil and terrible. Why do you hate them? Don't you see how scary you are?"

"I do not hate Muslims. I think Islam is a bad idea. I am not scary. Belief structures that legitimise hanging gay men and treating women like useless possessions of little more social consequence than a farm-animal are scary. They are a great deal scarier than people who want to point out that they are scary but only mildly scarier than people who want to stifle the opinions of those who think the belief structures themselves are scary by repeatedly asserting that criticism of the belief structure is akin to racism. It's not."

"How deep your Islamophobia runs. You need to see a psychiatrist."

"No, there's nothing wrong with me."

"That's exactly what you would say if there WAS something wrong with you."

"It is also exactly what I would say if there wasn't. I refer you to my earlier observations regarding your easily inferable internal model of People Who Are Not You."

"Why do you hate Muslims?"

"Why do you keep asking me that when I've already told you a ridiculous number of times that I don't?"

"Because you really DO hate Muslims and you just don't realise that you do. Why would you hate Islam so deeply if it wasn't because you hate Muslims? Don't you realise that Muslims and Islam are different things?"

"Yes, I understand that perfectly, which is why I said so as clearly and articulately as possible so as to avoid your supposing that I didn't. What I DON'T do is suppose that Islam and Muslims being different things is the end of the analysis, I also believe different judgements of them are possible through their being different things and I'm beginning to think that you don't. I'm also beginning think that the separation of Islam and Muslims is an idea you would prefer to have wrangled out of your interlocutor despite themselves, if you actually had any interest in separating a religion conceptually from its followers at all. If you had a deep-seated need to feel like you were defending somebody without having to go through any of the messy, complicated, cost-ridden physical, intellectual and emotional efforts of actually defending them from something, pretending that other people's words mean things that they don't and arguing with your imaginary version of their meanings would be an excellent way of doing it, wouldn't it? An Internet message board would be a wonderful way of doing it, too. People contradicted - any number of them. Muslims actually saved - zero."

"You hate Muslims. You hate them so deeply. Your hatred of Muslims is a scary bad thing. Scary Bad."

"You are an imbecile."

"Why do you hate Muslims?"

"Why aren't you on medication?"

"Why do you hate Muslims?"

"Noob. Ignored."

......

(Gr! Fucking bigots. Fucking Islamophobic SHITS. Fuck Fuck Fuck)

Type. Press. Search. Open Tab.... THREAD. THREAD, THREAD, THREAD!

"YOU THERE! Why do you hate Muslims?"

77 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"YOU THERE! Why do you hate Muslims?" (Original Post) sibelian Nov 2015 OP
I was specifically told by another DUer on this board that being anti-Islam is the same as being Coventina Nov 2015 #1
It's utterly ridiculous. sibelian Dec 2015 #18
That's what the far-right Christians say. Oneironaut Dec 2015 #36
Brilliant! beam me up scottie Nov 2015 #2
Thank you... sibelian Dec 2015 #38
We all do. beam me up scottie Dec 2015 #40
K&R nt LostOne4Ever Nov 2015 #3
My views on Muslims are well known, or so I've heard. /nt LiberalAndProud Nov 2015 #4
I've had this convo on DU more than I care to think about riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #5
Nailed it. Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #6
One can insert ANY religion in for 'Islam' and adherents of that faith will say the same thing. cleanhippie Nov 2015 #7
Link to one post where the response to criticising the Pope, Born Agains snagglepuss Nov 2015 #11
Plenty of posts just like you ask for, but I'm not doing your legwork for you. cleanhippie Nov 2015 #12
Yep. Xithras Dec 2015 #30
Ugh... sibelian Dec 2015 #39
Very apt description of the discourse here concerning Crunchy Frog Dec 2015 #70
Did you share this with the athiests? And swap Muslim with Christian when you do it. Township75 Nov 2015 #8
I don't see the problem there tkmorris Nov 2015 #10
Why? What will be so good about it? cleanhippie Nov 2015 #13
Do you think atheists don't criticize Muslims and Christians? beam me up scottie Dec 2015 #14
Careful, I think your bigotry is showing. mr blur Dec 2015 #17
I think the place I'm trying to get to between liberals and Islam and/or Muslims sibelian Dec 2015 #20
Dunno why; would read about the same to this atheist whatthehey Dec 2015 #28
I'm an atheist. I hate religion (Christianity included) but I don't hate religious people. Arugula Latte Dec 2015 #42
Excellent. Curmudgeoness Nov 2015 #9
Rec'd and kicked. Thank you. onager Dec 2015 #15
we're supposed to pretend we don't know of such things, onager Skittles Dec 2015 #16
It's a feckin' farce. sibelian Dec 2015 #49
Yes. I've got past the stage of being polite about these things, being European. sibelian Dec 2015 #19
What country are you in? What has been your experience? smirkymonkey Dec 2015 #27
I'm from Scotland, which is actually very VERY homogenously white. sibelian Dec 2015 #29
Thank you for sharing that. I have heard similar stories from others. smirkymonkey Dec 2015 #32
A lot of the media personnel are highly privileged, particularly in the BBC sibelian Dec 2015 #33
Interesting. Good to know. I often read the Guardian and am frequently smirkymonkey Dec 2015 #34
Yes. The Guardian's actually an excellent example of exactly what I'm talking about. sibelian Dec 2015 #37
Why are you here? rockfordfile Dec 2015 #46
I've been here for ages. sibelian Dec 2015 #48
Who do you think you are? Accusing a long time DU'er of not being worthy of posting on smirkymonkey Dec 2015 #51
Why are you here? beam me up scottie Dec 2015 #55
"You there. WHY DO YOU HATE LIBERALS?!" sibelian Dec 2015 #56
But it DID work, at least much better, in the past whatthehey Dec 2015 #61
The areas they actually came from were different in those days, too. sibelian Dec 2015 #62
Look at you, arguing with a made-up person. blogslut Dec 2015 #21
Yes. It was very satisfying. sibelian Dec 2015 #25
Well, people pray all the time, and that's "talking" to a made-up person-thing-being. Arugula Latte Dec 2015 #44
It's much easier to win against a straw man. n/t cpwm17 Dec 2015 #75
Indeed. In fact, victory is guaranteed! sibelian Dec 2015 #77
As Liberals, we need to challenge all ideologies Yavin4 Dec 2015 #22
I think it's an underdog thing theboss Dec 2015 #24
I understand the need to defend a minority group from hate here in the US. I get that entirely. Yavin4 Dec 2015 #31
You understand that need, but I offer Westboro Baptist Church, which did hundreds of hateful pickets Bluenorthwest Dec 2015 #57
Westboro Church is, like, 20 people all with the last name Phelps theboss Dec 2015 #58
minority group DustyJoe Dec 2015 #76
Exactly. We challenge conservatives and conservatism every day, too. arcane1 Dec 2015 #26
I would include cultural as well. True Earthling Dec 2015 #35
"I like to talk." nt Tommy_Carcetti Dec 2015 #23
It reminds me of a man who said Aerows Dec 2015 #41
I don't hate anyone. cwydro Dec 2015 #43
Me neither. sibelian Dec 2015 #45
I like what you post. cwydro Dec 2015 #47
Why do you hate Christians? Quackers Dec 2015 #50
CUZ THEY'RE FUNNY LOOKIN' sibelian Dec 2015 #54
Thank you! Behind the Aegis Dec 2015 #52
You're welcome and yes, it makes my blood BOIL. sibelian Dec 2015 #53
Yawn. closeupready Dec 2015 #59
Aw, man. sibelian Dec 2015 #60
Nothing personal. I don't think you and I ever disagree that much, and closeupready Dec 2015 #64
OK, I did go on a bit. sibelian Dec 2015 #66
I know you mean well, hon. closeupready Dec 2015 #72
:) sibelian Dec 2015 #74
What's your point RosedaleGuy Dec 2015 #63
It's a reactionary OP. Islam seems to exist in this weird vaccuum sibelian Dec 2015 #65
As usual, an excellent OP. hifiguy Dec 2015 #67
Well said. sibelian Dec 2015 #68
The ME has been a tribal slaughterhouse for a thousand years. hifiguy Dec 2015 #69
Of course, you could say exactly the same thing about Europe. Crunchy Frog Dec 2015 #71
Some people seem to think all of these numerous wars the US has started are natural disasters. cpwm17 Dec 2015 #73

Coventina

(27,115 posts)
1. I was specifically told by another DUer on this board that being anti-Islam is the same as being
Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:02 PM
Nov 2015

anti-Muslim.

As if opposing a philosophy is the same as hating on a person.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
18. It's utterly ridiculous.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 03:56 PM
Dec 2015

Completely and utterly brain-fucked.

The whole screed I put up there was very close to a real argument I had IRL with a proper flesh and blood person recently, it was like banging your head against a wall.

AARRRGH.

Oneironaut

(5,494 posts)
36. That's what the far-right Christians say.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 11:34 PM
Dec 2015

"Either love everything about our religion and never criticize it, or you hate all Christians."

cleanhippie

(19,705 posts)
7. One can insert ANY religion in for 'Islam' and adherents of that faith will say the same thing.
Mon Nov 30, 2015, 10:28 PM
Nov 2015

Even the ones here that say they agree with your OP.

snagglepuss

(12,704 posts)
11. Link to one post where the response to criticising the Pope, Born Agains
Mon Nov 30, 2015, 11:24 PM
Nov 2015

etc is the accusation that the poster hates Christians. It doesn't happen for a number of reasons. The one example where a comparison could be drawn are critical comments about Israel - within in minutes out come the accusations of anti-semitism.

cleanhippie

(19,705 posts)
12. Plenty of posts just like you ask for, but I'm not doing your legwork for you.
Mon Nov 30, 2015, 11:32 PM
Nov 2015

But I will get you pointed in the right direction.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1218

and especially

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1264

You'll need a shower after digging through the first, but a hazmat decon team will be needed after the second.


Enjoy!

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
30. Yep.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 05:39 PM
Dec 2015

I had almost the same conversation with someone about Israel more than once. Apparently opposing specific policies of a foreign government means that you're an antisemitic racist who just wants to see the Holocaust happen all over again. Or something. The logic tends to be too convoluted to pay much attention to it.

"Why do you hate Jews?"

"I don't. I believe that Israel's current policies are divisive and there are better..."

"So you hate Jews?"

"No. I have a great deal of respect for the Jewish people no matter which nation they live in. The currently unsustainable relationship between..."

"You may not realize it because it's so deeply ingrained in you, but you clearly hate Jews. Why do you want to see them murdered?"

"What? I don't. I want to see genuine actions by the Israeli government to compensate those who lost land during the formation of..."

"You wish Hitler had finished the job, don't you?"

"Sorry, I thought I was talking to a sane person. My mistake."

"See, you're running away now. Because I'm right and you can't hide the truth any more. You hate Jews."


To be fair, I've also had nearly the same conversation with Bible thumpers who translate disagreements about the history of Christianity into "I hate Christians", and my defense of free speech rights in a conversation with a local activist turned into "I hate non-cis people". The crazy part of that last one was that she wasn't even LGBTQ (I am), and that she was seriously arguing that assigning gender pronouns to infants is a hate crime against the infant and that CPS should be involved whenever parents are caught referring to their kid as "he" or "she". Apparently, if you disagree with that notion, you're a cisnormative anti-LGBTQ bigot.

It's the result of black and white thinking. We live in a shades of grey world, but some people insist that everything is black or white. You're either with us or against us. There's no room for rational discourse and free thinking.

Crunchy Frog

(26,581 posts)
70. Very apt description of the discourse here concerning
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 10:40 PM
Dec 2015

all matters pertaining to Israel.

The one about referring to a baby with a gendered pronoun being a hate crime is a new one to me.

Township75

(3,535 posts)
8. Did you share this with the athiests? And swap Muslim with Christian when you do it.
Mon Nov 30, 2015, 10:29 PM
Nov 2015

I'll enjoy reading that thread

tkmorris

(11,138 posts)
10. I don't see the problem there
Mon Nov 30, 2015, 11:12 PM
Nov 2015

My (Atheist) feelings towards Christians and Christianity parallel closely what the OP describes about Muslims and Islam. I don't hate Christians as a group in any way, shape, or form. Since there is not currently a shortage of them of course there are a fair few that I find individually to be rather obnoxious bucket-heads, but that is true of any group sufficiently populated.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
20. I think the place I'm trying to get to between liberals and Islam and/or Muslims
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 04:09 PM
Dec 2015

is where atheists and Christians kind of already are with each other.

whatthehey

(3,660 posts)
28. Dunno why; would read about the same to this atheist
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 05:23 PM
Dec 2015

I couldn't care less if person A believes that a zombie carpenter in a Roman provincial backwater died (well, for a bit) to save us from what he'd himself do to us if we don't love him enough or person B believes that a medieval Arab petty official was whisked a few hundred miles during the night to get told that Jesus was confused about his dad and that God sudenly decided that he needed a specific number of kowtows per day. I think what they believe is utter groundless claptrap that makes Lewis Carroll as credible as David Brinkley at best, and evil genocidal lunacy at worst though. But as long as all they do is believe it and not try to force its strictures and norms on the rest of us then have at it guys. After all some people believed Scott Walker could be the Republican nominee (ok ok I believed that...) so there's no accounting for credulity.

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
42. I'm an atheist. I hate religion (Christianity included) but I don't hate religious people.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 01:20 AM
Dec 2015

I'm able to draw a distinction between humans and the stupid primitive mythology they believe is "true."

onager

(9,356 posts)
15. Rec'd and kicked. Thank you.
Tue Dec 1, 2015, 01:28 AM
Dec 2015

Very well said. I spent about 6 years living in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia and Egypt) and have literally put my life in the hands of Muslims. I'm a Grumpy Atheist and some of my Muslim friends in Egypt knew that. Some of them had Egyptian friends who were atheists, though obviously they didn't go around announcing it. Egypt is downright liberal compared to Saudi Arabia, but you can still be arrested for "insulting Islam" by telling people you don't believe in it.

Which is one of the many problems I have with Islam, at least as practiced by some Islamists. Along with its absolute shit treatment of women. Anyone who wants to argue about that should go catch the movie Cairo 678. It's a fictionalized account of the very first sexual harassment case ever allowed in Egyptian courts. Which happened just a few years ago.

Skittles

(153,160 posts)
16. we're supposed to pretend we don't know of such things, onager
Tue Dec 1, 2015, 02:35 AM
Dec 2015

don't you know you have to agree with all of it?

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
19. Yes. I've got past the stage of being polite about these things, being European.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 03:59 PM
Dec 2015

I now regard my continent as being In Trouble. There seems to be an absence of straight thinking going on in some European liberal quarters.

YES there are lovely Muslims...pffff! The ones that AREN'T lovely are rather distinct from the rest of the world's Unlovely People.
 

smirkymonkey

(63,221 posts)
27. What country are you in? What has been your experience?
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 05:20 PM
Dec 2015

It would be interesting to hear it from someone who lives there.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
29. I'm from Scotland, which is actually very VERY homogenously white.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 05:36 PM
Dec 2015

Too cold for a lot of people.

But I'm still part of the UK and there was a big hoo-ha recently about a pretty big paedophile ring being run within a Muslim community in England and nobody believed the victims because the victims were young white working class girls and it was just assumed that they were racist because they were white. Rotherham it happened in.

There are big demonstrations against Islam that the media doesn't report. There are videos all over Youtube of Muslims threatening people with violence that never appear in European media. Everyone knows about it. It's not looking good. Working class people in Europe are getting sick of being ignored. I think if there was a more honest approach to discussing Islam in the media it would be better, but no matter what Muslims do they're always the victims, somehow. Not in all papers or TV shows, by any means, but there's a clear reticence to address the fact that Islam is a hegemonising ideology and wants to carry on being one in a cluster of societies that don't tolerate aggressive hegemonising swarms. It's ideologically impossible to resolve. The plain fact of the matter is that Islam is behind other religions in terms of integrating with liberal societies that offer a multicultural basis for the free practice of religion. There's a sizeable chunk of Muslims in Europe that just don't see it that way. As far as they're concerned They Are Right. Not all of them, of course, but that strand within Islam does make it stand out in terms of other religions in Europe, who have moved beyond that kind of zealotry.

There are reports I've seen from SG (Scottish Government) trying to establish how well integration is going between recently arrrived Mulsims and Scottsh society and one of the comments from a Mulsim was that "all the integration seemed to be one-way". I was like: "uuuuuuh, Yeah? That's what you do when you move to a different country? Are you expecting us all to change our laws to accommodate you? Why?"
 

smirkymonkey

(63,221 posts)
32. Thank you for sharing that. I have heard similar stories from others.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 07:11 PM
Dec 2015

Why is the media so reluctant to report on this? If it was a group of radicalized Christians exhibiting the same behavior, I am sure it would be quite a different picture. Sometimes I think the European media is too PC for it's own good and it seems like people are getting pretty fed up with it.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
33. A lot of the media personnel are highly privileged, particularly in the BBC
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 08:04 PM
Dec 2015

And they make a lot of weirdly subtle mistakes. A lot of them come from backgrounds with a very narrow range of experience in realpolitik.

I can really only speak of the UK, but even here I can see that the staff on these papers and news channels are populated with scores of media types driven by the "agenda in search of a story" process. They desperately want multiculturalism to work, but they haven't quite grasped that there's no reason for it to work. Also, the goals they want it to acheive are bizarre and I don't think they've fully analysed their own reasons for wanting it to work. Not only that but they contradict themselves philosophically all the time, I've lost count of the number of times I've been told that we couldn't possibly expect the Shiites and Sunnis to integrate in the ME and Iraq was a stupid idea in the first place and the British imperialists were just being horrible control freaks when they set it up.... and yet we are told to expect these same recalcitrant people (who can't be persuaded to accept neighbours whose belief systems are separated by A CIGARETTE PAPER'S WIDTH philosophically and yet murder and torture each other all the fucking time) to integrate freely and without consequence in the West, which has RADICALLY different expectations of its populace than the entre Middle East. It's just silly.

Also, gotta remember, Europe nearly ripped tiself entirely to pieces only a few decades ago during WWII. That passage I wrote in the OP above regarding their usage of Holocaust patterns to interpret the working class reaction to Islam is a good way of understanding it, they're trundling throug ancient tropes. They aren't good at seeing new patterns emerge, generally, mostly they just slap old patterns on new phenomena. They're very bad at understanding new ideas. Seriously. You should have seen the way the BBC reported on the Internet when it first took off. It was ridiculously badly informed.

People have this idea that British journalism is of a high standard. It's not at all. It's of a very LOW standard, it's just got posher accents and a whole load of nice old school ties. It's a Boys Club. The ideas it explores and propagates are dirt-simple and politically insensate.

I'm not joking. British news media is terrible. I'm not saying it's as bad as the worst of Fox News but it certainly isn't GOOD. There's slightly less pressure on UK media to produce stories that hit the mark, but they're still under the same kinds of pressure as media anywhere else, they can only report on things that fit certain narratives. They have a handful of neat little ideas that they can fit their stories into, anything outside that blob isn't actually recognisable to a lot of them, let alone reportable.

They'll be shit-scared of causing riots if they broadcast movies of anti-Islam demonstrations. They're still trundling round in "cultural relativism" where Islam mustn't be criticised because that's what the nasty right wing people do.

 

smirkymonkey

(63,221 posts)
34. Interesting. Good to know. I often read the Guardian and am frequently
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 09:07 PM
Dec 2015

not impressed. I thought that it was the NYT of the UK. I sometimes check the DM because they have the best photos, but it's incredibly right wing. However, I sometimes think the comments in the Guardian sound so bitter and I am a little shocked at how the DM comments don't sound quite as ridiculously right wing as I would expect them to. I almost find more rw comments in the Graun.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
37. Yes. The Guardian's actually an excellent example of exactly what I'm talking about.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 12:05 AM
Dec 2015

They were appalling during the Scottish independence referendum.

Simple things kept getting misunderstood and misinterpreted. Over and over again we got this "why break up the marriage" thing. And to start with it seemed like a useful metaphor... but then as the stories progressed, more and more "marriage" and "divorce" talk came out of them and they were just USELESS, it was as if they really thought it was a real marriage and they were about to go through a real divorce! The language they were using was exactly like that of a soon-to-be-jilted spouse, mean while Scottish people were looking at economics, energy production, democracy and how it works in Europe and all they could come up with was stuff like "decorating your new bedrooms, are you? You haven't moved out yet, you know!" All this wacky pub-talk type stuff, no actual criticism of the idea of independence at all, just muddy, dumb reaction. "It's not fair, you hate us!" Over and over again we got this "braveheart" thing and "the Scots are trying to find their identity." They didn't listen to a WORD. Honestly, it's like the Reader's Digest for liberals. American journalism is FAR better.

Basically it's a bunch of incredibly blinkered hand-wringers in Islington. All kind of studenty and half-finished ideas and moral concepts they've copied off posters in the student union lounge, ya know? And they've got a hero-complex the size of a fucking brontosaurus. They are SO pleased with themselves, and they really have no right to be.

rockfordfile

(8,702 posts)
46. Why are you here?
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 01:45 AM
Dec 2015

You don't sound like a democrat or a liberal. Your comments come off almost like you hate liberals. I'm liberal and a atheist.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
48. I've been here for ages.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 01:55 AM
Dec 2015

I don't hate liberals. I don't call myself one as I'm from a completely different political spectrum in the UK where the term has a different meaning, I'm an old school Scottish lefty that believes in infrastructure investment, investment in people and public works. There is a clear division in my country between working class left and establishment left, thats what my comment was addressing, albeit in a roundabout fashion.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
55. Why are you here?
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 05:52 AM
Dec 2015

I've been here 11 years longer than you, I'm liberal, an atheist and I endorse the op.

Hell, I fucking LOVE the op.

Who died and left you in charge of DU?

whatthehey

(3,660 posts)
61. But it DID work, at least much better, in the past
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 11:53 AM
Dec 2015

I spent a few years in the UK 30 years or so ago, staying in an area that was extensively populated by Asians (Bradford). Every corner shop, and somehow those places stocked everything in a place the size of a bus shelter in the US, was run by a subcontinent origin family, often 2nd generation. At a rough guess I'd say 30% of the people I ran into were likewise. Not a peep of trouble from any of them. Maybe saw a couple of khimars and quite a few but not universal hijabs. Don't remember a full burka or even niqab. I'd see far fewer but not zero Muslims in the pubs, and still more Sikhs who never seemed to do the full 5 k thing but almost all wore the bracelets I can't remember the name of. They didn't seem insular or antagonistic at all, although like any minority population regardless of race they often clustered in the same neighborhoods just like Little Italy was born. Certainly took part in general commerce and social intercourse with the majority. The only slight issue I saw was that I was there for the furor over The Satanic Verses and saw a single graffito supporting the fatwa.

I'm still in touch with a Brit or two and they tell me it's far worse now, but that raises the question why. Was it Islamic radicalization from newer poorer migrants? Back then you'd routinely run into an Indian PhD who was running a restaurant or driving a cab, as only the upper middle class could afford to emigrate from India. Was it a backlash against anglo racism? Again dating myself but this was the height of the skinhead fad and they were neither shy nor alone in their beliefs. I clearly remember openly discussed and even advertised "Paki-bashing" events. A reaction to global politics as the west and Islam cane into more frequent conflict? I have no idea but it's universal IME that people at the very worst say it was better a generation ago. So what worked better then and why can't it work again?

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
62. The areas they actually came from were different in those days, too.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 02:39 PM
Dec 2015

Burqas and niqab wearing has increased in the ME since then, largely through generalised fundamentalisation of the whole region.

No trouble... well the West as infidel and Great Satan is fairly recent. Yeah, I think global politics is a factor.

Other than that... I don't know what's wrong. Certainly one thing stands out in comparison with previous decades - they are in Europe in far, far greater numbers now. Some towns are majority Muslim towns. Maybe there's a threshhold beyond which people just don't feel the need to be as accommodating.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
25. Yes. It was very satisfying.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 04:36 PM
Dec 2015

Also, not that dissimilar to real arguments I've had.

Don't YOU have imaginary arguments with people? I love it, I always win.

Anyway, I'm fed up with it.

Yavin4

(35,438 posts)
22. As Liberals, we need to challenge all ideologies
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 04:30 PM
Dec 2015

whether that ideology is political, economic, social, and in particular, religious. We challenge Christianity all of the time, but that never gets interpreted as hating Christians.

 

theboss

(10,491 posts)
24. I think it's an underdog thing
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 04:31 PM
Dec 2015

Which is weird in a way since Saudi Arabia is about the furthest thing one can be from an underdog.

Yavin4

(35,438 posts)
31. I understand the need to defend a minority group from hate here in the US. I get that entirely.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 05:47 PM
Dec 2015

But, we can still scrutinize an ideology without hating its adherents.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
57. You understand that need, but I offer Westboro Baptist Church, which did hundreds of hateful pickets
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 08:51 AM
Dec 2015

of LGBT funerals and other gatherings, hundreds of them over many years, happening in all 50 States while no one outside the LGBT community acted upon the need to defend us from that aggressive onslaught of hate. No one did anything about it but us for years and years.

So, were were our defenders? I can tell you where, they were absent, silently agreeing with Phelps. 'Oh, his methods are not nice but he is speaking Scripture' is what the 'mainstream' clergy would say when asked to say or do any little thing to defend us. They refused. For years.

 

theboss

(10,491 posts)
58. Westboro Church is, like, 20 people all with the last name Phelps
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 11:06 AM
Dec 2015

And their entire family business model is built around the fact that they have never been a physical threat to anyone. Anytime they're "rights" are violated or they've been physically accosted, they've sued and made money.

The fact that people even know their name is more of a testament to their incredible marketing skills than any threat they possess.

DustyJoe

(849 posts)
76. minority group
Sat Dec 5, 2015, 09:32 AM
Dec 2015

With 2 billion muslims in a total world popilation of 7 billion this 30% minority seems to have no problem defending themselves from the infidels.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
26. Exactly. We challenge conservatives and conservatism every day, too.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 05:15 PM
Dec 2015

But nobody says DU is a bigoted hate site.

True Earthling

(832 posts)
35. I would include cultural as well.
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 10:34 PM
Dec 2015

Any practice or custom regardless of origin that is based on a false belief, superstition or bad science that causes harm to others should be challenged.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
41. It reminds me of a man who said
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 01:00 AM
Dec 2015

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

 

cwydro

(51,308 posts)
43. I don't hate anyone.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 01:27 AM
Dec 2015

But I don't like any religion that makes women second class citizens. Or a religion that kills gay people.

Nope, I don't like that religion.

Behind the Aegis

(53,956 posts)
52. Thank you!
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 03:14 AM
Dec 2015

ESPECIALLY for ripping apart the most ignorant (and slightly homophobic) argument of "love the sin, hate the sinner" bullshit argument, which has been used! It isn't the same.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
53. You're welcome and yes, it makes my blood BOIL.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 05:27 AM
Dec 2015

It's just drooling blockheadedness using that argument to defend Islam. The level of homophobia I don't know if I care that much about in the grand scheme of things given how much else there is of the flat out obvious kind but it is UTTERLY tone deaf.
 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
64. Nothing personal. I don't think you and I ever disagree that much, and
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 04:07 PM
Dec 2015

I'm sure you're a very nice person.

But in my mind, liberals are supposed to be intelligent and are supposed to seek to build bridges to help bring humanity together. But what I get on here increasingly is how we should be bombing these people, and killing those people over there, torturing others is fine under some circumstances, exiling others, etc. If I want that fucked-up shit, I'll wander over to one of those other boards.

When anger and hate starts to define the tone of this board and every single thread that involves muslims or Islam, I'm so done.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
66. OK, I did go on a bit.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 09:27 PM
Dec 2015

....and I suppose I should have included a paragraph about hoping for greater Islamic apostasy or at least moderate versions of Islam eventually squashing the radical ones.... but then I'm telling entire populations of religious people how their religions should develop which would be totally weird from me as I don't buy their religion anyway. It would be sort of hypocritical.

Yes, the bombing and killing is awful. I'm not sure what else can happen, now. I'm not pleased with the bloodlust that seems to ripple out of some posts on discussion sites across the web on that issue.

I am also not at all pleased with the "torture is sometimes OK" crowd, but it's a discussion that just falls flat when you progress two sentences beyond their assertion. Supporting torture is just a hopless failure of human existence as far as I'm concerned and as soon as someone falls through that crack, that's it, there doesn't seem to be any of getting them back. I hadn't seen any of that here, but I'll take your word for it.

There IS a slithering, vengeful delight that creeps around in the background of these ideas. My hope is that whatever military action takes place is demonstrably necessary and not conducted in the service of some politician's grand dream of regime change or some neurotic nationalistic fever.

Pffff, who am I kidding, of course it will be.

So yeah, I think you're right, really.
 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
72. I know you mean well, hon.
Sat Dec 5, 2015, 12:18 AM
Dec 2015
You are a liberal, as I am. Let's hope that tomorrow, peace will somehow become the norm, and do what we can to help make it happen.

On edit, you know, take as an example, New York City. The very name, New York City, seriously engendered fear in people who were sentient in the 70's and 80's. Not as any literal evil incantation, but rather, the idea of a place where violence and mugging and abuse of all kinds were becoming normative. Now, it's the safest city in the US, maybe even one of the top ten safest in the Western hemisphere. I mean, transformations and change do happen.

RosedaleGuy

(89 posts)
63. What's your point
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 03:20 PM
Dec 2015

If you're not Muslim then of course you disagree with Islam. Everyone disagrees with 99% of all beliefs. Moreover, most Americans know almost nothing about Islam. Shall I list all the beliefs I disagree with?

Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Mormonism, Atheism, Agnosticism, African shamanism, wicca, satanism. ... get the point.

Why single out Islam?

Let us not forget the world's greatest religion...materialism or the worship of money.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
65. It's a reactionary OP. Islam seems to exist in this weird vaccuum
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 09:14 PM
Dec 2015

In some quarters where critising it really DOES get conflated wth "racism" against its followers. There have been a lot of posts recently on other OPs here recently accusing folks of Islamophobia when some of us are trying to make the point that the conduct of Islamic terrorists is explicable through ISLAM as much as through reaction to being the victims of Western aggression. I don't discount Western aggression entirely, obviously, it's a major factor, but I don't think it's an either/or thing. I think it's both, and very often more because of Islam than Western aggression.
 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
67. As usual, an excellent OP.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 09:35 PM
Dec 2015

You are a highly perceptive and logical person and I always enjoy your writing.


Sam Harris was and is right. Period. Whether people want to admit it or not, the truth is what it is.

The contortions some here subject themselves to in order to avoid staring this truth in the face are extremely dispiriting. While any religion or belief system that appeals toand is based on placating an invisible and unknowable Final Authority can, and inevitably, will be used to justify barbarism, the facts of the modern world show that over the last few decades only one is consistently (NB, I said consistently, NOT exclusively) the source of the most barbaric and inhuman outrages imaginable. Too many people would rather be "politically correct" than face the truth.

“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire

Of all human inventions, it is beyond any rational question that religion is the worst, most useless and most destructive.

The knee-jerk reactions seen here in the last couple of days which try to explain away the motives underlying this atrocity and the source of those motivations are in a way understandable but do not bear serious scrutiny; Many if not most of us on the left are always ready to stand up for a perceived underdog. In most cases that is admirable, and in many it is morally necessary; in this case it's like deliberately putting out one eye and wearing a patch over the other. It's a conditioned reflex based in some sort of senseless and free-floating cause-free guilt, which is a mental dysfunction beyond the scope of this post. A dispassionate reflection on the assembled facts show it to be a grievously wrongheaded response.

It's not without precedent. Back in the 1920s and 1930s many of the US left denied or would/could not allow themselves to believe the reports of Stalin's almost incomprehensible brutalities, atrocities and purges, and now the same mindset of denial is being repeated, once again in the face of contrary facts. There is such a thing as a belief system, be it Stalinism or islam - and I am not conflating the two, merely using them as individual and separate examples - that have in their DNA what can only be called evil or barbarism. How often must history teach this lesson? Xtianity seemed to have outgrown this - though I have no time for it or any other religion - but the same sorts of ignorant and barbaric yawps that stoked the pogroms and the Inquisition are once again being heard in this country not only from unhinged dingbats like the PP shooter but from actual presidential candidates.

But then I'm on the autism spectrum and my mind works like Data's or Spock's. Logic and nothing but.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
68. Well said.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 10:12 PM
Dec 2015

Your comparison to the defense of Stalin is highly apt.

It's clearly not within our power to explain what it is about this belief structure that makes it prone to such acts of cruelty, and we CANNOT explain it away as a region specific anomaly as similar acts have been performed now by putatively "Westernised" Mulsims. But denying it is utterly futile.

We cannot possibly explain away this religion's bloodthirst in terms of reaction to the West. The way these countries treat their own citizens is frequently equally horrific, also all political and national factions seem equally culpable.

I would urge anyone on this site who still thinks Islam is a religion of peace to go to Youtube and search under the terms "Syria abuse" and be prepared for an experience somewhat more raw than the now sadly typical cop abuse videos that generate so much controversy in the Western media. There is a great deal of information about the horrible situation Syrian civilians frequently find themselves in freely available, in the moving image.

There seems to be a particular delight taken in inflicting revolting levels of pain and humiliation on bound, helpess, terrified men. I have no idea how the women are affected by these processes, I can only assume it's as bad or worse, there's very little footage available in that regard and anyway, I don't think I could watch it.

The West has nothing to do with any of this. I am not going to be told that the evidence found in these videos is to be regarded by me as beyond my understanding through being a white Westerner and imposing my own cultural values on them. Muslims themselves have PLENTY to say about them.

I had considered linking to them here, but it's pointless. They would be hidden.

There's only one thing the perpetrators of all these crimes have in common.
 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
69. The ME has been a tribal slaughterhouse for a thousand years.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 10:24 PM
Dec 2015

Maybe more. Blood feuds, religious wars, regular wars, sheer madness and often all of these, simultaneously, have been the order of the millinnium save for the Ottoman Peace. All the western powers, especially His Chimperial Fraudulency, did was give a hornet's nest another periodic poke.

When your worldview is based solely on placating an eternally pissed-off and psychotic godhead and physically annihilating the wrong-believing scum on the other side you do not deserve to claim the term "civilized." It's barbarism, plain and simple, and I can and will call it nothing else. It deserves nothing but the scorn and contempt of civilized cultures wherever else they may be in the world. It's the modern-day version of the Huns, Visigoths or Vandals.

And thanks for the compliment.

Crunchy Frog

(26,581 posts)
71. Of course, you could say exactly the same thing about Europe.
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 10:47 PM
Dec 2015

It was only WWII that finally put a stop to it. I doubt you'll find much in ME history to compair with the 2nd World War.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"YOU THERE! Why do ...