Hard News: The Solipsistic Left
350 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 14 Newer→ Last
-
A few facts about Islam:
In Wahabist Saudi Arabia, women must be veiled in public and are forbidden to drive.
In 90% Sunni Indonesia, with the world's largest population of muslims, a woman can go out, veiled or unveiled, on her motorbike pretty much whenever she chooses.
There are at least 20% more christians in Indonesia than there are in Australia (CIA World Factbook).Of course I'm only doing Osama's spadework here.
-
You'd have to look at which country has more influence over islam though: is it rich Saudi Arabia, with Mecca and Medina to where muslims go on pilgrimage, and which funds mosques around the world (including NZ). Or, is it poor and populous Indonesia?
-
"who wins if the US and multi national forces leaves Iraq"
I have to agree that there is a very real danger that Iraq could be taken over by the Iraqis.
Surely none of us want that to happen?
-
I think instead you'd be looking at even more deaths through increased sectarian violence, then a proxy war between Sunni and Shi'a states that'll likely escalate into a direct conflict in Iraq.
-
You'd have to look at which country has more influence over islam though: is it rich Saudi Arabia, with Mecca and Medina to where muslims go on pilgrimage, and which funds mosques around the world (including NZ). Or, is it poor and populous Indonesia?
Have to? That's quite an authoritarian streak you're developing there. Should you tire of your current day job, you might just have the makings of a fundamentalist mullah.
Seriously though, you got a point. The Saudis have been actively asserting their influence in Indonesia since the late '60s, mainly with financial gifts, such as petrodollar-funded girls' schools in the matrilinear Minang district of West Sumatra (another example of the non-monolithic nature of Islam), and more recently by training Indonesian clerics.
Since the downfall of Suharto the state philosophy of pancasila (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancasila_%28politics%29) has been eroded by Islamic fundamentalists. The first of pancasila's five principles was that you must subscribe to a monotheistic religion. It didn't necessarily have to be Islam. In the Moluccas, for example, Christian & Muslim communities co-existed, even helping one another with the building of mosques and churches. This kind of thing had Saudi-trained clerics throwing up their hands in holy horror. Suharto was happy to stoke the conflict along via the Indonesian military, who actively funded and transported Islamic activists into hot spots in the dying months of his regime.
Like the Timorese death squads and the state-backed provocateurs who fomented conflict with Indonesia's ethnic Chinese, the righteous Islamists have pretty much outlived their usefulness. -
Joe,
I would argue that Pancasila is still the central tenet of the Indonesian nation, and has, in reality, been strengthened by the democratic debate. And a debate there certainly is too, of a sort that Indonesia in its whole history has never been able to have. It's an ironic situation where the one nation in South East Asia that comes closest to the term "liberal democracy" in 2007 is RI.The challenges to Pancasila do come from the Muslim parties, who, I agree, have more of a voice, but this being a democracy with 86% professing the Islam faith, that's not unlikely.
Re Mecca....don't the hundreds of millions of Catholics in South America owe their allegiance to an old man in Rome.
The Saudis may have poured funds into this nation but so have the Japanese (by the billion, some as war repartions..for example the University in Nusa Dua, and the beach in Sanur near here), and the US, who are funding parts of the public education system (and providing every school in the archipelago with Sesame Street as well!)
A good Balinese friend of mine is politically active, and quite vocal. His group was approached with an offer of funding by a US aid person two weeks ago, they declined.
-
James,
I think it is plainly obvious that many on the left/ progressive sphere around the world are in a de-facto alliance with the extreme elements in the Middle East, not by deliberate design, but in practical effect.
We fellow travelers are still waiting for your, from inside the USA, perspective, answers as to our questions about your Abu Ghraib statement. You need to back your assertions please.
Your Post writer is a goodie too.....how was that?
-
I would argue that Pancasila is still the central tenet of the Indonesian nation, and has, in reality, been strengthened by the democratic debate.
Good to hear & thanks for that. Would be nice to have the first principle amended to give the option of being a godless apostate, though.
-
A great article in today's Journal.
The Trouble With Islam
Sadly, mainstream Muslim teaching accepts and promotes violencehttp://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009890
The money graphs:
"It is vital to grasp that traditional and even mainstream Islamic teaching accepts and promotes violence. Shariah, for example, allows apostates to be killed, permits beating women to discipline them, seeks to subjugate non-Muslims to Islam as dhimmis and justifies declaring war to do so. It exhorts good Muslims to exterminate the Jews before the "end of days." The near deafening silence of the Muslim majority against these barbaric practices is evidence enough that there is something fundamentally wrong."
&
"Yet it is ironic and discouraging that many non-Muslim, Western intellectuals--who unceasingly claim to support human rights--have become obstacles to reforming Islam. Political correctness among Westerners obstructs unambiguous criticism of Shariah's inhumanity. They find socioeconomic or political excuses for Islamist terrorism such as poverty, colonialism, discrimination or the existence of Israel. What incentive is there for Muslims to demand reform when Western "progressives" pave the way for Islamist barbarity? Indeed, if the problem is not one of religious beliefs, it leaves one to wonder why Christians who live among Muslims under identical circumstances refrain from contributing to wide-scale, systematic campaigns of terror."
That'is two top quality articles in a couple of days that make the same or similiar points to the ones I have been making. For those of you who still disagree, all I can say is that you are on a river in Africa, in de Nile. 'nuff said.
-
Yet it is ironic and discouraging that many non-Muslim, Western intellectuals--who unceasingly claim to support human rights--have become obstacles to reforming Islam.
Well now you're making another argument. I think this thread has demonstrated that some on the left are sympathetic towards Islam - for reasons that utterly baffle me - but I find it VERY unlikely that this has any effect on the dialog within Islamic countries.
Take Saudi Arabia - hardly any Saudis speak English, they don't have the internet and it's almost impossible to get any non-religious material broadcast. Virtually all western media is banned. Jjust how much of an effect do you think Sean Penn and Michael Moore (or whoever) have on the debate about the role of Islamic reform?
If you ask yourself how much impact Islamic clerics like Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais or Muhammad Sayyid Tantawy - currently the two most famous and influential Imams in Sunni Islam - have on religious debate in the west then that's approximately how much influence western liberals carry within the Islamic world.
-
I'd wger that some of the left sympathy for Islam is more of an alliance of convenience - you know, they are clearly focused on their traditional enemies in the centre or right, and anyone who is not of the latter is a potential ally to be co-opted. Given the minority position most islamic groups would fill in most Western states they probably are not deemed a serious threat. Same happens all over the place, for example the coalitions of different faiths that sometime build over certain issues...
So, in otherwords "stupid, surprising and improbably coalitions often form that are hypocritical in nature"
-
"some on the left are sympathetic towards Islam"
Many of those you call the "left" are deeply unhappy about a minority group in western society being abused and persecuted due to their religion. In the same way we defended Jewish people being persected in the 1930's we defend Muslim victims of persecution today.
If you need to know why go back and read James's posts in this thread.
-
Errm, I don't think the Jews in the thirties are comparable to the muslims of today, unless you wish to Godwin yourself of course.
As an aside, the Jews had precious few defenders in the thirties. That's kind of why things happened the way they did.
-
Yup. I think conflating Muslims who live here with their co-religionists elsewhere is a grave mistake. And treating them as some sort of subversive, fifth column force of evil is reprehensible.
-
jesus... the thread that wouldn't die.
yes. some muslims in some parts of the world, especially the middle east, are freaking nutters with god-complexes.
and yes, some parts of the entire islamic world religion are a bit fucked up. they bully women and gays, they are excessively conservative, and they are heavy and aggressive proselytsiers. but so are great swathes of the christians.
just because some are like that, islam itself isn't a threat to humanity, nor are the people who attend the mosque in kilbirnie a band of terrorists.
and anyone who says they are a band of terrorists is either a bigot or liar.
until they actually blow something up... in which case i'll eat my words.
and until then, as stephen says,
treating them as some sort of subversive, fifth column force of evil is reprehensible.
-
Many of those you call the "left" are deeply unhappy about a minority group in western society being abused and persecuted due to their religion. In the same way we defended Jewish people being persected in the 1930's we defend Muslim victims of persecution today.
And so am I. But people get so enthusiastic in their outrage of muslim persecution that they end up defending the Islamic faith by making patently absurd claims like 'it's a religion of peace!' and thus become apologists instead of merely insuring that muslims enjoy access to the same rights and freedoms that the rest of us do.
-
I've only ever heard the phrase "religion of peace" from right-wing bigots using it sarcastically.
If you have an example of someone from that elastic group of people who get referred to as "The Left" please do share it?
-
Hilariously, the first attributed quote for "Islam is a religion of Peace" I can find via Google is from George Bush.
-
While I doubt these guys fit anyone's definition of "the left"
-
Juha, maybe the decade sonic chose is far too close to Hitler's atrocities to be relevant. But for the sort of casual underlying racism and mis-representation sonic is talking about I suggest you go and read a John Buchan novel or two.
Whilst the plots are gripping, the anti-sematism and racism catch you like barbed wired. All excused today by saying that JB was "just" a product of his time.
-
The 'religion of peace' quote is actually W's - but if you want proof that there is a tradition of left-wing sympathy for Islam then just take a gander back through this thread.
-
Danyl, personally I mistrust the people who are telling me not to like Muslims. The sources give me context.
I distrust religions but really feel that "liberalism" has as much to do with economics and education than religion.
-
No, I'm not going to stand for rubbish like that. Muslims aren't being persecuted like the Jews were. I really shouldn't have to say this.
-
grammar should also have place in the education system...
-
Juha, no, nor are Muslims being thrown into slavery in their 100s of 1000s as Africans were. Their is casual discrimination that is becoming pervasive and this is similar to attitudes in Europe a century ago. Go to France, Spain, Greece, Germany, USA and listen. What I read in many circles today is similar to the output 100 years ago by otherwise reasonably liberal people like John Buchan. They are also being excluded economically in those societies in the same way Jews and non-conformists were. These are similarities, not equivalents. If you still find this offensive then I certainly apologise even if I don't quite follow.
Just for the record, I don't think Europe can ever repay the Jews for 2000 years worth of persecution and murder. Giving them Finland or Austria instead of Palestine might have at least been a more equitable payment.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.