generalizations don’t mean anything. making judgements based on cultural behavior patterns over long periods of time doesn’t amount to racism, it amounts to rationalism. the arab race has nothing inherently to do with my arguments. my problem with the muslim immigrants is that many, if not most they are also importing a foreign, dangerous ideology that is decidedly bad for anyone who values that of the european enlightenment and its successors. worse, the radical islam seems to not just come with the immigrants, but only with a few of those with greater influence who are then actually spreading it in their new homes.
you may think from these positions that i’m prejudiced against islam. well, I am. remember however, that i’m also prejudiced against all religion, my problem with the muslims is that they actually care about their religion enough to enfore its obscene laws, atleast in the countries where they are the majority. when was the last time i heard about someone being stoned to death in France for wearing a garment of two different kinds of thread? more seriously, when was the last time I heard of an adulterous German lady or two gay kids in Italy being hung for giving eachother hand jobs or something?
in fact, if you subscribe to the doctrines of blind multiculturism i would suggest that you might be the racist. allowing things like these to go on and for the same attitudes to start pervading your own society under the guise of “oh, isn’t that cute, these people are different” is demeaning to humanity in general. personally, i know there are some people in these muslim societies that are like me. being something of an outcast in my own tolerant society, i can only imagine how they are in Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc with no legal protections and infact legal proscriptions.
certainly things like this are far off for France and the rest of europe, but radical islamic fundamentalism is definately on the rise, with support of people like Bin Laden and Zarquawi pervasive in immigrant cultures in europe.
I don’t even know where to start with your flames, Sil.
Firstly, there is a problem with generalizations and it isn’t because someone doesn’t generalize that that person is turning a blind eye to what’s wrong with something. I personally don’t like radical islam or radical any religion either, but I don’t go around classifying anyone and everyone that come from a given area as a dangerous islamic fundamentalist. The majority of people that try to go somewhere want to build a better life for themselves and their family and end up living in less than optimal conditions. You’re blaming the problems in Europe and fundamentalism on the fact that they let in millions of immigrants that were all fundamentalists. That’s absurd. That’s racism. That’s xenophobia.
I know a bunch of Iranians in the states and in Canada. The ones that I know got out of Iran because its a fuck hole not to export the ideology of a minority of the population.
There’s a saying that goes “correlation doesn’t prove causation”. I could very well make a much more reasonable argument about how the fact that the socio-economic conditions these communities are in predisposes people to be affected by that kind of ideology. If you want to make a generalization about people, make one that is easy to support and realize that people are drones and no matter what their socio-economic background is, weak individuals will seek to conform and belong and usually have a given group give them an identity which they want to follow. This will apply to muslims, Americans, the French and just about any group. The fact this happens is independent of how it happens. Hate the system and hate the weak. Don’t blast those that don’t cause problems because they live or come from somewhere other people cause problems. Its like saying all Americans are fucktards because of what happened in Iraq and after 9/11. That’s not the case. Blame the sheep that are too timid to confront the trouble makers or the weak that follow them mindlessly. The cultural phenomenon and clashes you’re observing especially in Europe are occuring for specific reasons and if you don’t target the reasons these are occuring then you won’t fix the problem. If you want to kill them or toss them out, its called genocide.
There is nothing dangerous about Islam. What is dangerous is fundamentalism, which really isn’t the least bit more widespread in Islam than in Christianity ( and certainly not in the past. ) Sharia ( or obscene laws ) has actually very little do with actual Islam. It is perhaps the very best example of religion being abused in the ineterst of the few – it creates a political powerbase for a fairly small group of clergymen who would otherwise have had none.
Don’t forget that we had to import idea back from the Arabs during the Reneissance. They were the enlightened at the time when Europe was ravanged by Christian Law, Inqusitions and Witch Hunts. There would’ve hardly been any enlightenment in Europe without Islam and the Muslim World.
in fact, if you subscribe to the doctrines of blind multiculturism i would suggest that you might be the racist. allowing things like these to go on and for the same attitudes to start pervading your own society under the guise of “oh, isn’t that cute, these people are different” is demeaning to humanity in general. personally, i know there are some people in these muslim societies that are like me. being something of an outcast in my own tolerant society, i can only imagine how they are in Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc with no legal protections and infact legal proscriptions.
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying they need to be integrated, but they need to be integrated with respect, not with racists attitudes. There is little to nothing to be gained from brutal assimilation.
when was the last time I heard of an adulterous German lady or two gay kids in Italy being hung for giving eachother hand jobs or something?
Fifty, thirty, twenty years? Not long.
certainly things like this are far off for France and the rest of europe, but radical islamic fundamentalism is definately on the rise, with support of people like Bin Laden and Zarquawi pervasive in immigrant cultures in europe.
and i don’t know where to start with your total misrepresentation and misunderstanding of almost everything i’ve said here. first of all, flames? where? there’s no unqualified flame of anyone else from this board anywhere in my posts. the closest it comes is directed to a rhetorical audience, and after a qualification “i would say you are the racist, then”.
secondly, your second sentence is almost impossible to understand. i stopped trying to interpret it because it’s giving me a headache trying to read it. the rest of that paragraph is a misintinterpretation. I never said everyone who comes from north africa or the middle-east is a dangerous islamic fundamentalist. all my mentions of islamic fundamentalists are carefully qualified. infact, if anything, i said that the majority of immigrants are coming to europe WITHOUT islamic fundementalism, only its seeds, which are planted in the environment of economic insecurity that lets them grow. your citings of my alleged idiotic beliefs that every arab is an “exporter of islamic fundamentalism” are so wrong that i have trouble believing you actually read my post.
please stop mischaracterizing everything i say, if you’re doing on purpose. shame. i ignored your first post though it was similarlly misleading, but this is just too much. don’t respond if you won’t take the time to accurately portray my ideas, i know your messageboard harem will just latch onto your flawed interpretations.
We can only understand what you’ve written from what you’ve written, not what you’ve intended to write. What you’ve written is written in such a way that it takes great effort to interpretate it as anything else than generalising racist bullcrap.
christian fundalmentalism is on the rise, but as of yet they have not crashed jetliners into western skyscrapers nor are likely to do so in the near future. sorry, your comparison is inadequate. fundamentalist christianity exsists mostly in western countries with stable democratic governments and social orders, fundamentalist islam does not.
Sharia ( or obscene laws ) has actually very little do with actual Islam. It is perhaps the very best example of religion being abused in the ineterst of the few – it creates a political powerbase for a fairly small group of clergymen who would otherwise have had none.
Sharia is outlined in the Koran and hadith. There’s no way you can argue that it has little to do with actual islam, it has everything to do with islam at its core. further, it is my very concern that this small group of radical clergy is hijacking otherwise non-radical muslims with their ideologies. this abuse of sharia and fundamentalism is as outlets for political and social angst is my issue with this.
Fifty, thirty, twenty years? Not long.[/quote]
fifty years is pretty long, especially since i unwisely chose the historically fascist examples. its in the last 50 years that fundamentalist islam has caved in other social movements in the islamic world and become such a force to be concerned with.
If I’m misinterpreting what you’re saying , then you should be more careful with how you express yourself because Nulani and I interpreted what you said in the same way. My first post was well in context to counter the misinformation you were presenting about immigration conditions.
To rephrase the sentence you don’t understand:
“generalizations don’t mean anything. making judgements based on cultural behavior patterns over long periods of time doesn’t amount to racism, it amounts to rationalism.”
Here you’re justifying racism through blind rationalizations.
“if you subscribe to the doctrines of blind multiculturism i would suggest that you might be the racist”
Here you say that not being judgemental and discriminatory is bad.
You present 2 extreme views and make it as if there’s no middle, if you’re not a racist, you can’t make value judgements about something that is bad, like Sharia. You 're saying you’re either 1 way or the other when the situation is far most complex because the situation you’re describing about the different kinds of people involved is much more complex than you depict it to be.
The only seeds of fundamentalism that people migrate to europe with are the same that are found within everyone else in this world, and that was one of my points in my last post. This seed is called human nature.
well i guess if you don’t care to read, i can’t do anything. this is the society after all that prefers The Da Vinci Code and Harry Potter to Shakespeare and T.S. Eliot. i concede.
That’s only because it doesn’t have to. It’s already powerful enough to attack liberal and secularian principles without violence.
Sharia is outlined in the Koran and hadith. There’s no way you can argue that it has little to do with actual islam, it has everything to do with islam at its core.
Sharia is indeed outlined in the Koran, but as it is practised has very little to do with what is outlined in the Koran.
further, it is my very concern that this small group of radical clergy is hijacking otherwise non-radical muslims with their ideologies. this abuse of sharia and fundamentalism is as outlets for political and social angst is my issue with this.
I’m worried with them too: anyone who isn’t is naive, but I’m equally worried about radical ecclesiastics. (Radical Christians.)
fifty years is pretty long, especially since i unwisely chose the historically fascist examples.
It isn’t long. It’s less than a generation.
well i guess if you don’t care to read, i can’t do anything. this is the society after all that prefers The Da Vinci Code and Harry Potter to Shakespeare and T.S. Eliot. i concede.
I read, but I’m not an Oracle. I can’t possibly know or guess what you’ve intended to write. And actually, I haven’t read Dan Brown or J.K. Rowling, but I’ve read Katherine Mansfield, James Joyce, William Golding, E.A. Poe, W.H. Auden, George Orwell and T.S. Eliot. Don’t insult me unless you’ve the grounds to.
I think that if I was incapable of reading I wouldn’t be where I am. As Nulani said, we’re not psychic. As I said before, if you have a problem with our response, choose your words more carefully.
I actually disagree with Sinistral, isn’t that amazing? But the brutal fact in what he said still remains, though it doesn’t really have anything to do with Nazi-Germany: that Christian fundamentalism has seen to the discrimination, segregation and even death of Jews (and many others.)
You obviously don’t understand the concept of the Third Reich; it is directly related to the original Holy Roman/German Empire. “The Nazis sought to legitimise their power historiographically by portraying their rule as a continuation of a Germanic past. They coined the term Das Dritte Reich (“The Third Empire” – usually rendered in English in the half-translation “The Third Reich”), counting the Holy Roman Empire as the first and the 1871 Empire as the second.” - Wiki
People in Europe were anti-semitic. The Nazis drew on this anti-semitism. What kind of justification did the Nazis give for anti-semitism and what kind of justification do Neo-nazis continue to give to anti-semitism? Its very similar to the kinds of arguments we’re hearing now about Europe vs Turkey with Europe being Christian. Back then, it was the Jews. Whoever it is, they’re portrayed as a plague upon society and each person is a miasma that needs to be exorcised :P.
Nazism is exemplary of the way people use fundamentalism for their own ends. As you said and as I said, it has nothing to do with religion. Just like fundamentalism. And just like then with Nazism, Islamic fundamentlism gives people something to latch onto because it is easy to hate, as you are demonstrating so well in this thread yourself.
I think the point is that <i>any</i> type of fundamentalism, whether it be Christian, Nazi or Islamic is a narrow and dangerous path to tread. The ideology that adheres to a strict, unbending doctrine is one that opposes democracy, liberty and personal freedoms indeed, but I find it hard to say that one type of religious fundamentalism is <i>more dangerous</i> than another simply because, as Sin said, populations of people are flexible (i.e. sheep, albeit sheep with different leaders), and can create cultures that do not necessarily integrate well with each other. And really, if Christianity started in the east and Islamic ideology started in the west, who knows what the current global scheme of things will be, if any different?