Sharia Law

Yes I know it’s not racial but someone else posted - There's tolerance, and then there's being completely blind towards the threat from a fundamentally fanatical race that worships a literal doctrine of oppression, bloodshed, war, and world domination [my bold]

[SIZE=11pt]It a certain mindset common to hate mongers in this case it is a religion that is being demonized but at other times it is race, or sexuality or some other difference. [/SIZE]


*

[SIZE=11pt]But it isn’t united there are lots of different interpretations of Islam I mean just to take the biggy the Sunni Shia divide. [/SIZE]

*

[SIZE=11pt]But you seem unable to show in any rational or reasonable way that I am mistaken. [/SIZE]

*

Is hatemongering extremist?

 

[SIZE=11pt]Scratcho[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]An aside[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Look up India’s First War of Independence, very bloody, and involved both Hindu and Muslim Indians ‘we’ the British put down what we called the ‘mutiny’ and then had some ‘rebels’ killed by strapping them to the mouth of a cannon and blowing them apart.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Also look up the violence involved in the ‘Partition’ which was part of the Independence process between Muslims and Hindu Indians (it has soured relations between Pakistan and India ever since). [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]edit[/SIZE]


Are you familiar with the work of Adam Curtis?

If not I’d give it a go -

The Power of Nightmares

https://archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares-Episode1BabyItsColdOutside

This is 3 one hour episodes

Bitter Lake

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02gyz6b

I think it’s also on YouTube if this link isn’t accessible (might be UK only)

This is a 2 hour film (a bit hard going but interesting)

 

TO REPEAT – scaremongering, fear mongering and hate mongering of Muslims in general which a number of posts in this thread have been doing is in my opinion counterproductive.

That hate was hanging about the thread like a fart in a lift

Thankfully a number of people (not all) have clarified their positions – which I believe is (and correct me if I’m wrong) that they do not want to spread fear or hate of Muslims in general but are against the violent people that do terrible things in the name of Islam and those that support such violence.

Well yes but I’d say I’m opposed to that kind of violence from whatever source it might spring from be it motivated by religious or secular ideology.

I’m a student of history and if it teaches one thing it’s that is that you should never be surprised by human being’s ability to be brutal to other humans.

I oppose it all as well as the hate mongers that often are the cause, (and talking out against hate mongers does not mean I support the brutality hate can produce).

You don’t tackle the radicals by stigmatising 23% of the world’s population, because you are likely to make a bad situation worse, the problem is that there are ‘extremists’ on either side that want just that.

By chance this was in todays Guardian.

By scapegoating Muslims, Cameron fuels radicalisation
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/24/scapegoating-muslims-cameron-radicalisation-terror-wars-liberties-british-values

 

Anyway – I’ll ask again – what would be your solution to tackling radical Islam?

 

The first thing to understand is that, if someone's answer here is "I don't know", that doesn't mean radical islam is not a problem that needs tackling. It's possible for us to recognize an issue and not have the knowledge to suggest a viable strategy.

It appears to me this must be fought on a 100 different fronts; through law, literature, culture, security, military engagement, education, etc. The power must be given to the most moderate muslims for them to be the tip of the spear in dismantling radical islam.

 

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

I’ll repeat something I posted earlier -

[SIZE=11pt]In basic terms ‘we’ have to make secular ideas more attractive than the alternatives. The problem in my view, is that at the moment the ideas that dominant the western ‘liberal’ countries (especially the US) don’t seem that attractive. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]As I pointed out earlier there was a time when secular ideas were attractive to many in the Middle East (and many other places) but what was attractive were the reformist, liberal and progressive ideas of the left. The problem was that even when not communist or even socialist those ideas were often seen as dangerous by anti-communist western governments, who often took action against them. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Basically what the reformers wanted was to undermine the old power structures which were conservative (and often more religious in many cases tribal and/or based in patronage) through equalizing mechanisms and the distribution of wealth (land reform, nationalization of resources, as well as bringing in universal education, welfare, healthcare etc).[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]It had appeal because it was about helping the community as a whole. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]The capitalistic alternative doesn’t have that appeal because it didn’t seem to do anything about tackling inequality (often seeming to entrench or increase it) while been all about ‘corrupting’ and ‘soulless’ consumerism. And it put a lot more emphasis on the individual the problem with that it can emphasize difference, [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt] The neo-con dream that a neo-liberal/free market system could be imposed on Iraq and be welcomed with open arms backfired badly, it just made a bad situation worse. And made the US look less like liberators and more like ‘crusaders’ playing right into the hands of Muslim extremists. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]So historically the US did a lot to undermine left wing secularism in the Middle East has no attractive alternative for people to get behind so it was no wonder that the winner in that region has been religion. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Secularism grew in Europe and the US (sometimes referred to as The Enlightenment) because secular ideas seemed more attractive than the religious alternatives (less so in the US after the rise of Social Darwinism, but that is another story), religion seemed brutish and violent after many years of religious wars and in many places churches were seen as corrupt and venal. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]In the US this brought about the separation of the church and state along with constitution rights. In Europe the French revolution promoted the whole human rights angle and lead to the growth of socialism.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]I think there will be a backlash against the extremists but that does not mean that what then appears is secular or progressive (especially with Wahhabism so well financed) [/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]S[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]o to repeat if ‘we’ are to tackle the rise of religious ideas (and I’m not talking about the extremists they are just criminal nutjobs) then ‘we’ need secular ideas and societies that seem like attractive alternatives.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Wahhabism spread because it set up schools and taught its ideas, we need to do the same. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]The problem is that the secular neo-liberal/free market ideas that are dominant at the moment in the west and especially in the US seem to many to be corrupt and venal. [/SIZE]

 

[SIZE=11pt]Law – as I’ve pointed out before that is basically already in place[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Literature, culture- as I’ve said the [/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]problem in my view, is that at the moment the ideas that dominant the western ‘liberal’ countries don’t seem that attractive. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Military engagement – This route will not be that successful if it is just military engagement [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Education – I agree but as I asked earlier what do you teach? [/SIZE]

*

[SIZE=11pt]Also remember that I’m an atheist and am not a fan of religion so I’d prefer to promote secular ideas. [/SIZE]

 

Here is an interesting case

An extremist attacks someone in a supermarket in broad daylight hacking them with a machete they hold in one hand and hitting them with a hammer held in the other while shouting out extremist views.

Now if the extremist had been a Muslim extremist that would have fitted right in with the whole Islamic terrorist mindset of the moment and got widespread coverage as such.

But the person involved was a far right extremist who attacked a doctor because he looked Asian supposedly as revenge for the extremist Muslim’s killing of Lee Rigby.

Thing is that it wasn’t counted as terrorism but just as a murder attempt.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/25/zack-davies-racist-guilty-attempted-murder-dentist

 

Geez., what a doofus......
that is because that is exactly what it was, a lone nutbag trying to kill someone.
it was not methodically planned, financially backed, there was no declaration of political agenda and it was not orchestrated to instill fear and "terror" in others in order to force compliance.


you really are stretching it here Balbus, in true troll fashion.

 

There are no musts about it. As long as you see that something needs to be justly repressed you just perpetuate the idea. It is the same idea they have. Tactics may vary. Lets ally with those that agree with our purposes in order to defeat the ones we disagree with. It is possible that one group can over come another, temporarily, until there is another schism in passionate opinions and this can a does occur between those previously allied. This obviously has not proven to be a viable strategy over time. The enemy is not out there it rallies around our own verdicts. The viable strategy is to become the thing that you want to see, men at peace. As long as you see the need for confrontation with others you have not attained a viable strategy for peace. Charity they say begins at home.

 

There is another aspect to what we see. If not for the arms producers arming conflicts we wouldn't have mass atrocities.

 

It is suggested that moderate islam be given the power to spearhead such and such. How is such power conferred? Anyway the effort is incongruous with the idea that islam is fundamentally bankrupt.

 

It strains credibility to accuse others for what we whole heartedly do to others.

 

ALL world religions. In detail. The whole shebang. That's one course. Another course if basic critical thinking; symbolic logic; propositions; the value of evidence . . . etc.

This seems to be a tangent related to the word choices of a media outlet; kind of a non sequitor in this thread. I don't see the relation between this and the fact that ISIS would behead you, Balbus, you PERSONALLY, and your entire family, for not believing that Allah is God and Muhammad is his messenger.

It is completely incongruous; but we must start somewhere in this upside world and situation. You can't make several billion muslims suddenly realize "Wow, my religion is garbage, and I've wasted decades of my life on a lie and a bullshit, and my entire identity is founded on the insane ravings of an ancient warlord merchant"; that's too high of a mark. But if we take the "least" deluded people, and empower them through resources and media to be an actual voice for the rest of them, then we might start to see a trend of positive change.

 

[SIZE=11pt]How by force or by inspiration, to me force is unlikely to work and in fact is likely to have the opposite of what you wish to achieve – but to inspire you need ideas that inspire - the[/SIZE][SIZE=11pt] problem in my view, is that at the moment the ideas that dominant the western ‘liberal’ countries (especially the US) don’t seem that attractive. [/SIZE]

edit

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Oh that just sounds like bribery – and that doesn’t seem very inspiring. [/SIZE]

 

Right, you can't make anyone realize anything. You can't bring truth to illusion and make illusion real. But you can recognize your own position. We are creature. Having and being are the same thing. It is the example of being that teaches. From a peaceful space you see the trend emerge locally. Resonance or large oscillation is a matter of frequency and duration. A consistent voice outlasts an inconsistent one. This plays out in real life as people find refuge with me. That is ask the people who are close to me.

The temporary alliance has been the status quo. The current state of affairs suggests our previous learning is suspect.

 

Yeah, the influential are already having their influence

 

To me it seems that the problem with that kind of solution is that Islam isn't something people embrace because of ideas, but emotions like fear and so on. Most Muslims have been programmed from childhood to believe in Islam. It isn't something they have chosen because they've looked at various sets of ideas and decided Islam is the best thing.

The agenda of the extremist isn't a rational position. Nor is the agenda of Islam in general.

It seems very doubtful to me that people conditioned by Islamic values are going to embrace things like women's equality. gay freedom, or the right of others to eat bacon or drink beer.

Maybe such changes could happen over a long period of time as they did in the west. Hundreds of years. But we don't have the luxury of time.

 

[SIZE=11pt]Blake [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Do I have to keep pointing out that it did happen in the past and continues today [/SIZE]

I mean the big example is Turkey, secularise by Atatuk, its had its ups and downs and recently was drifting to more Islamic thinking But the gains of the secular and left wing HDP in the last elections are encouraging.

[SIZE=11pt]“[/SIZE]The HDP's rise is partly down to its strong social democratic message, which also appeals to non-Kurds. With two charismatic leaders, male and female, and many women candidates, it is promoting gender equality in a patriarchal society. It is also focused on green and LGBT rights, fielding Turkey's first openly gay candidate.” bbc

Oh and you might be interested in this -

[SIZE=11pt]Why the revolutionary Kurdish fight against Isis deserves our support [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/10/revolutionary-kurdish-isis-ivana-hoffman[/SIZE]

 

Surely you have to know that wasn't what I was asking.

That's an answer to my actual question.

And we still have pockets where our process isn't complete, as we saw in Charleston. It only takes one hardcore case to do a lot of damage.