Muslim Ban Over Handshake. Whaddayareckon Liberals?

[Exi5tentialist]

Seth thinks we are a left wing echo chamber.

Exi thinks we are a right wing echo chamber.

To be attacked simultaneously from the purveyors of extremist lunacy at both ends of the spectrum is all the proof we need that we are in about the right place!

Jim - is that your answer to my request above:-

When you refer to me being on "the left" or me being a "marxist" you are not saying ANYTHING. Try to argue your points without using vacuous labels which you are only using because you think they have value as terms of abuse. Heed your own advice for once, please. Attack the argument, not the person.

? Because if it is, I declare your standard of moderation to be absolutely shite.

It's rich you referring to yourself as being the moderate centre between two extremes when you come out with shit like this:-

Fuck 'em, I'm over stupid fucking muslims.

If you're looking for a purveyor of extremist lunacy, you don't need to be looking to me. You just need to look in the mirror.

[JimC]

To say you are a purveyor of absolute lunacy is attacking your message, not you...

[NineBerry]

There aren't millions of versions of Islam. There aren't even 100. There's like 3 schools with a couple of dozen branches.

There's lots of informal differing interpretations of Islam.

You're also implicitly implying Ayaan doesn't know what she's talking about, which is hilarious.

She doesn't know what she's talking about. Being a victim doesn't make you an expert.

[pErvinalia]

You can't claim in the same sentence that the problem is both capitalism and economic deprivation.

What the fuck are you talking about? Capitalism thrives on economic deprivation. Do you think it's the purpose of economic competition to make everybody rich? Is there not a smidgeon of winners and losers in your analyss?

Stopping half the potential workforce from selling their labour is anathema to capitalism.

What absolute shit. Destroying your competitors' economies is the very basis of capitalism. Why do you think Iraq was bombed to smithereens? Because of something Saddam Hussein did? Jeez, grow up.

How does western economic colonialism have anything to do with muslim people treating women like shit? You are making zero sense.

Western economic colonialism is destructive and predatory. Holding down competitor economies is its modus operandi. Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan did not have a hope of enjoying continued women's liberation after the west's intervention in their internal politics.

It's not a case of a discontinuation of women's liberation. They have gone terribly backwards. You still haven't explained what capitalism has to do with that.

Not to mention, oppression pre-dates capitalism.

So fucking what?

It's a shame you can only ingest one sentence at a time. I explained below what is what.

So the same argument he uses against Islam - that it post-dates misogyny - can be used for capitalism.

I don't even know what you're supposed to be talking about here.

Stop ranting and raving and start thinking. You said that we shouldn't blame Islam for the treatment of women by Muslims, as misogyny pre-dates Islam. The same fucking argument can apply to capitalism.

I didn't say "we shouldn't blame Islam for the treatment of women by Muslims, as misogyny pre-dates Islam". I would never fucking say such a stupid thing. And if I did say it, which I didn't, I fucking repudiate it here and now.

Now, please provide a link to where I said that. I think you are paraphrasing me badly and you have completely changed my meaning. If I am wrong, prove it. And not, please, by saying "read your own words". I need a fucking link this time. Get on with it.

Apologies. I think it might have been nineberry or someone else.

[JimC]

There aren't millions of versions of Islam. There aren't even 100. There's like 3 schools with a couple of dozen branches.

There's lots of informal differing interpretations of Islam.

You're also implicitly implying Ayaan doesn't know what she's talking about, which is hilarious.

She doesn't know what she's talking about. Being a victim doesn't make you an expert.

It's the interpretations of Islam that involve violence towards apostates and infidels that matter, and they are not rare (although obviously still a minority). If they were a very rare minority, we would not be having frequent, continuing violence inspired by Islam...

[Animavore]

There aren't millions of versions of Islam. There aren't even 100. There's like 3 schools with a couple of dozen branches.

There's lots of informal differing interpretations of Islam.

You're also implicitly implying Ayaan doesn't know what she's talking about, which is hilarious.

She doesn't know what she's talking about. Being a victim doesn't make you an expert.

How is she a 'victim'? Have you read her stuff?

[Exi5tentialist]

I'm sure Ayaan Hirsi Ali is just being Islamophobic when she criticises the rampant misogyny of Islam.

http://observer.com/2016/04/why-ayaan-h ... -liberals/

Criticisng Islam is not the same as supporting the bombing of Muslim countries by post-colonialist countries.

I have consistently stated that too many right-wing racist groups in the west use criticism of islam as a front for racism.

Exi seems to think that this means one is never, ever allowed to criticise this misogynist violent religion at all, because doing so is automatically racist.
Jihadists the world over are rubbing their hands together with glee when the politically correct left in the west gives them such a get-out-of-jail-free card...

Some muslims are misogynist right-wingers. In "criticism islam for its misogyny", you generalise to all muslims. You would not do this to any other minority.

We do it regularly with Catholicism

Firstly, the Roman Catholic Church is an organisation. It is the subset of a religion. Second, Roman Catholicism is a predominantly white religion, and it's not possible for white people like you and me to be racist about white people. It's just isn't. Criticising Roman Catholicism for its sexism is quite legitimate. There are too many versions of Islam to do the same, and most muslim are brown or black so it has become a substitute for racism.

orthodox Judaism

Again, orthodox Judaism is a subset of a religion. It is hardly racist to criticise sexism in orthodox Judaism. But to talk about Jewish misogyny as a feature of Judaism? I would object to that as anti-semitic.

, and Hinduism.

Is that the religion with the god with six arms? It's hardly raised itself as a widespread subject of criticism in the west has it? It hasn't actually gained the same status in the atheist community as a religion to bash freely, as Islam is?

Pull your fucking head in.

Likewise.

When you refer to me being on "the left" or me being a "marxist" you are not saying ANYTHING. Try to argue your points without using vacuous labels which you are only using because you think they have value as terms of abuse. Heed your own advice for once, please. Attack the argument, not the person.

What he means is the authoritarian left. Authoritarianism is evil and leads to such things as state communism and fascism. Very few of us here will willingly be lectured to by an authoritarian.

Well we're going to continue to disagree, then, because I don't think there's any such thing as the "authoritarian left". This is what I was saying when you were all enjoying that circle-jerk political compass shit. Right IS authoritarian. Left IS democratic. If you continue to swallow right wing propaganda that Stalin is on the left and Hitler on the right, communism on the left and fascism on the right, when they are all on the right, then we will continue to disagree very badly. That is my analysis. Now what insult are you going to cook up for that?

[Exi5tentialist]

You can't claim in the same sentence that the problem is both capitalism and economic deprivation.

What the fuck are you talking about? Capitalism thrives on economic deprivation. Do you think it's the purpose of economic competition to make everybody rich? Is there not a smidgeon of winners and losers in your analyss?

Stopping half the potential workforce from selling their labour is anathema to capitalism.

What absolute shit. Destroying your competitors' economies is the very basis of capitalism. Why do you think Iraq was bombed to smithereens? Because of something Saddam Hussein did? Jeez, grow up.

How does western economic colonialism have anything to do with muslim people treating women like shit? You are making zero sense.

Western economic colonialism is destructive and predatory. Holding down competitor economies is its modus operandi. Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan did not have a hope of enjoying continued women's liberation after the west's intervention in their internal politics.

It's not a case of a discontinuation of women's liberation. They have gone terribly backwards. You still haven't explained what capitalism has to do with that.

Capitalism exercises its economic and military might through the major capitalist states and particularly the capitalist superpower. You only need to think about the involvement of those states in the middle east since 1945 to realise the way that capitalism has exploited countries where islam is predominant and has lately taken to downright subjugating them. If muslims in regions of the world are permitted to compete in a thriving economy on equal terms with the west there is no reason why their economies and social structures can't develop as the west has done. But for heaven's sake, when the west is undermining your government and bombing your economy to bits you don't stand a chance, and for westerners to then come back and blame your religion is just idiocy.

Not to mention, oppression pre-dates capitalism.

So fucking what?

It's a shame you can only ingest one sentence at a time. I explained below what is what.

So the same argument he uses against Islam - that it post-dates misogyny - can be used for capitalism.

I don't even know what you're supposed to be talking about here.

Stop ranting and raving and start thinking. You said that we shouldn't blame Islam for the treatment of women by Muslims, as misogyny pre-dates Islam. The same fucking argument can apply to capitalism.

I didn't say "we shouldn't blame Islam for the treatment of women by Muslims, as misogyny pre-dates Islam". I would never fucking say such a stupid thing. And if I did say it, which I didn't, I fucking repudiate it here and now.

Now, please provide a link to where I said that. I think you are paraphrasing me badly and you have completely changed my meaning. If I am wrong, prove it. And not, please, by saying "read your own words". I need a fucking link this time. Get on with it.

Apologies. I think it might have been nineberry or someone else.

Well that's good. It was confusing the issue a lot.

[pErvinalia]

I'm sure Ayaan Hirsi Ali is just being Islamophobic when she criticises the rampant misogyny of Islam.

http://observer.com/2016/04/why-ayaan-h ... -liberals/

Criticisng Islam is not the same as supporting the bombing of Muslim countries by post-colonialist countries.

I have consistently stated that too many right-wing racist groups in the west use criticism of islam as a front for racism.

Exi seems to think that this means one is never, ever allowed to criticise this misogynist violent religion at all, because doing so is automatically racist.
Jihadists the world over are rubbing their hands together with glee when the politically correct left in the west gives them such a get-out-of-jail-free card...

Some muslims are misogynist right-wingers. In "criticism islam for its misogyny", you generalise to all muslims. You would not do this to any other minority.

We do it regularly with Catholicism

Firstly, the Roman Catholic Church is an organisation. It is the subset of a religion. Second, Roman Catholicism is a predominantly white religion, and it's not possible for white people like you and me to be racist about white people. It's just isn't. Criticising Roman Catholicism for its sexism is quite legitimate. There are too many versions of Islam to do the same, and most muslim are brown or black so it has become a substitute for racism.

orthodox Judaism

Again, orthodox Judaism is a subset of a religion. It is hardly racist to criticise sexism in orthodox Judaism. But to talk about Jewish misogyny as a feature of Judaism? I would object to that as anti-semitic.

, and Hinduism.

Is that the religion with the god with six arms? It's hardly raised itself as a widespread subject of criticism in the west has it? It hasn't actually gained the same status in the atheist community as a religion to bash freely, as Islam is?

This is unrelated to what I was replying to. You said we don't criticise other generalised minorities (not that Islam is in any way a minority). I pointed out that we do.

When you refer to me being on "the left" or me being a "marxist" you are not saying ANYTHING. Try to argue your points without using vacuous labels which you are only using because you think they have value as terms of abuse. Heed your own advice for once, please. Attack the argument, not the person.

What he means is the authoritarian left. Authoritarianism is evil and leads to such things as state communism and fascism. Very few of us here will willingly be lectured to by an authoritarian.

Well we're going to continue to disagree, then, because I don't think there's any such thing as the "authoritarian left". This is what I was saying when you were all enjoying that circle-jerk political compass shit. Right IS authoritarian. Left IS democratic. If you continue to swallow right wing propaganda that Stalin is on the left and Hitler on the right, communism on the left and fascism on the right, when they are all on the right, then we will continue to disagree very badly. That is my analysis.

Ok, well that makes you a right winger as you are most definitely an authoritarian.

[Exi5tentialist]

Exi5tentialist wrote:

...Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan did not have a hope of enjoying continued women's liberation after the west's intervention in their internal politics. ...

What utter crap. The Taliban was in power - were they suddenly going to have a change of heart and allow women any form of freedom? You know about them closing all the girl's schools, I hope? Or is your romantic view of the brave freedom fighters against the oppressive west that blinkered?

I agree it is unfortunate that the brave freedom fighters agains the oppressive Soviet Union after 1979 invasion were so quickly turned into anti-Western resistance but equally it is utter crap to think that the Taliban developed in an environment of non-interference between 1979 and 2016. And if the west's intervention was such a good thing in 2001, it didn't exactly put right the problem, did it? The 2016 Taliban are more right-wing, more vicious, and control more Afghan territory than at any time since the West's intervention. And you are really saying that the Taliban is an example of Islam that has developed independently of Western/USSR interference? If so, you really are in denial.

The destruction of economies by military means promotes the development of reactionary resistance movements. To pretend that those resistance movements arose from Islam is to deny the reality of imperialist intervention.

And incidentally... you may not have come across those pictures of Afghanistan before 1979. Women wearing western clothing walking freely, alone, in the street. Afghanistan was in a period of economic ascendency then. The USSR and USA put paid to that. And you blame ISLAM?

[pErvinalia]

How does western economic colonialism have anything to do with muslim people treating women like shit? You are making zero sense.

Western economic colonialism is destructive and predatory. Holding down competitor economies is its modus operandi. Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan did not have a hope of enjoying continued women's liberation after the west's intervention in their internal politics.

It's not a case of a discontinuation of women's liberation. They have gone terribly backwards. You still haven't explained what capitalism has to do with that.

Capitalism exercises its economic and military might through the major capitalist states and particularly the capitalist superpower. You only need to think about the involvement of those states in the middle east since 1945 to realise the way that capitalism has exploited countries where islam is predominant and has lately taken to downright subjugating them. If muslims in regions of the world are permitted to compete in a thriving economy on equal terms with the west there is no reason why their economies and social structures can't develop as the west has done. But for heaven's sake, when the west is undermining your government and bombing your economy to bits you don't stand a chance, and for westerners to then come back and blame your religion is just idiocy.

I agree with all of this. But it has nothing to do with your contention. It applies to both men and women. It doesn't explain why women have gone backwards in comparison to men.

[Exi5tentialist]

This is unrelated to what I was replying to. You said we don't criticise other generalised minorities (not that Islam is in any way a minority). I pointed out that we do.

But the examples you gave are not generalisations. Roman Catholicism and Orthodox Judaism are specifics with specific doctrines applying across the all the organisations under those lables. "Islam" is a generalisation. And people do not generally generalise about Hinduism.

Those are bad examples.

Ok, well that makes you a right winger as you are most definitely an authoritarian.

Give me an example of where I have shot strikers, overthrown an elected government, deleted your posts or anything else that is classed as "authoritarian". How are you defining an authoritarian? Somebody who gets angry with racists, bigots and islamophobes?

[Exi5tentialist]

Capitalism exercises its economic and military might through the major capitalist states and particularly the capitalist superpower. You only need to think about the involvement of those states in the middle east since 1945 to realise the way that capitalism has exploited countries where islam is predominant and has lately taken to downright subjugating them. If muslims in regions of the world are permitted to compete in a thriving economy on equal terms with the west there is no reason why their economies and social structures can't develop as the west has done. But for heaven's sake, when the west is undermining your government and bombing your economy to bits you don't stand a chance, and for westerners to then come back and blame your religion is just idiocy.

I agree with all of this. But it has nothing to do with your contention. It applies to both men and women. It doesn't explain why women have gone backwards in comparison to men.

Misogyny, homophobia, racism, ableism, ageism - all these things are features of lower-income societies under capitalism. And societies that have been "bombed back to the stone age". Like Afghanistan. If you send countries back in time economically, they will go back in time on all of these axes of oppression. That is a feature of contemporary western imperialism.

[pErvinalia]

This is unrelated to what I was replying to. You said we don't criticise other generalised minorities (not that Islam is in any way a minority). I pointed out that we do.

But the examples you gave are not generalisations. Roman Catholicism and Orthodox Judaism are specifics with specific doctrines applying across the all the organisations under those lables. "Islam" is a generalisation. And people do not generally generalise about Hinduism.

Those are bad examples.

I really don't know what point you are trying to make.

And in any case, most of us don't criticise all Muslims (therefore not all of Islam either). Which you'd know if you dropped the hate and bias.

Ok, well that makes you a right winger as you are most definitely an authoritarian.

Give me an example of where I have shot strikers, overthrown an elected government, deleted your posts or anything else that is classed as "authoritarian". How are you defining an authoritarian? Somebody who gets angry with racists, bigots and islamophobes?

That's pretty shit logic, even by your standards.

Your intolerance for reasonable free speech is what makes you authoritarian.

[Tyrannical]

Exi5tentialist wrote: If you're looking for a purveyor of extremist lunacy, you don't need to be looking to me. You just need to look in the mirror.

I think in this case purveying extreme lunacy is a vast understatement. You can't actually really believe that do you? You're just trying to troll us right? It was the evil western colonialism that forced the end of the arab/africa slave trade. And about twice as many women as men were enslaved, so that should give you an idea of who the real misogynists were