Islamophobia/Anti Muslim rhetoric

[TempestOfTempo]

To all my brothers and sisters, let’s pray tonight for the victims of all genocide no matter their religion, gender, race etc

Im with that!

 

[MoDc]

Should prolly just leave this alone because he aint someone I have ever taken seriously, but is this like the alt-right thing that was called out where a bunch of Caucasian guys trashed on their own females and opined how Asian women were the new standard bearers of femininity?

yeah it’s basically like that, guys like Makow think western woman are too “uppity” so they encourage dating Asian woman as they see them as more submissive

 

[ShiningCarat14]

I don’t understand how people paint a whole community with the same brush. You are scared to go out at night because of these terrorist attack and you have every right to be. But I’m also scared as a hijabi girl having been told by my prime minister that my mother looks like a bank robber. I am scared of being slaughtered by the same “terrorist” who you fear for not being Islamic about or my non hijabi sisters being mistaken as non Muslims and being slaughtered.
But I don’t blame that on a whole community. I don’t blame the whole of the white British community for the man who tried pulling my mums hijab off. I don’t blame the KKK for their ties with white nationalism. Hating ideologies is different to hating a whole religion. Misinformation is the deadliest weapon as is leads to misunderstandings and misunderstandings lead to hatred

 

[TempestOfTempo]

yeah it’s basically like that, guys like Makow think western woman are too “uppity” so they encourage dating Asian woman as they see them as more submissive

Once they marry a traditional Asian woman they are likely to be confronted with a very different reality than their self-created one...... perhaps thats why divorces among those couples is sky high..... like as soon as shes legal w/her green card and etc. shes outta there if the guy aint living up to his end of the bargan.

 

[MoDc]

I don’t understand how people paint a whole community with the same brush. You are scared to go out at night because of these terrorist attack and you have every right to be. But I’m also scared as a hijabi girl having been told by my prime minister that my mother looks like a bank robber. I am scared of being slaughtered by the same “terrorist” who you fear for not being Islamic about or my non hijabi sisters being mistaken as non Muslims and being slaughtered.
But I don’t blame that on a whole community. I don’t blame the whole of the white British community for the man who tried pulling my mums hijab off. I don’t blame the KKK for their ties with white nationalism. Hating ideologies is different to hating a whole religion. Misinformation is the deadliest weapon as is leads to misunderstandings and misunderstandings lead to hatred

Other than the spike in 2001 on the graph you posted, a whole lot of attacks come from the far right and I’m much more worried about them than Muslim extremists. The majority of Islamic terror related deaths occur in Muslim countries to other Muslims...

There has been a lot of targeted violence against Muslims in the US and elsewhere so I understand your valid fears about being in public with your head coverings.

 

[ShiningCarat14]

I totally agree that the silence of muslim countries is allowing these crimes to fuel. I’m ashamed as someone from Pakistani heritage that Imran Khan chose to support the genocide of China because of a trade agreement. I don’t care if China are powerful. Surely the lives of humans are to be of superior priority? It’s disgusting. How can we blame the west for their wrongdoings when Saudi continue to let out bombs in Yemen. When our own ummah is against each other because of money and power. How can we fight if our leaders agendas are to divide us

Other than the spike in 2001 on the graph you posted, a whole lot of attacks come from the far right and I’m much more worried about them than Muslim extremists. The majority of Islamic terror related deaths occur in Muslim countries to other Muslims...

There has been a lot of targeted violence against Muslims in the US and elsewhere so I understand your valid fears about being in public with your head coverings.

Thank you sm, Even though I’m 2nd gen British I felt privileged to have what I have in this country. Since I’ve been a little girl I’ve dreamt to be a journalist but then I look around and see the abuse my people get and it makes me question if I even have a future in Britain. Muslim cleansing is a threat but it’s swept under a rug.
I appreciate people like you so much because the way the media has portrayed us it’s understandable to
Misinterpret who we are
Im still very lucky and very grateful I’m in a much better position than others I just hope that I can represent them

 

[Serveto]

Im with that!

Even if it does seem dated, let the neo-cons explain this, and watch them jump through the hoops of fire in the process ...

The King of Iraq
As U.S. troops leave the country, one man stands to benefit above all: Moqtada al-Sadr.
BY BABAK DEHGHANPISHEH | AUGUST 20, 2010, 9:24 PM

It would be hard to imagine a more unlikely meeting. Late in July, the tempestuous Iraqi Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr traveled to Damascus from Iran, where he’s been living in exile for the past three years. The trip looked at first to be a routine photo-op for Sadr and Syrian President Bashar Assad. That is, until Sadr met with Ayad Allawi, a top contender for the prime minister post in Iraq and one of the cleric’s sworn enemies. Their mutual enmity dates back to a showdown in the holy city of Najaf in the summer of 2004. Sadr’s Mahdi Army fighters had taken over the city and were using the Imam Ali shrine, one of the holiest sites for Shiites, as a base of operations. Allawi, who was interim prime minister at the time, gave American and Iraqi troops the green light to take them out, killing dozens of Mahdi militiamen in the process.

So it was no small thing for the two to meet in person. And they didn’t just talk; they were laughing and hamming it up as if they were the best of friends. The photos and video footage from that meeting are some of the only public examples of Sadr smiling (the more common profile is a scowling Sadr, wrapped in a white martyr’s shroud, pounding a pulpit). Sadr had good reason to be happy: He now holds the fate of his one-time enemy in his hands.
Sadr — feared by some, reviled by others and revered by a broad swath of Iraq’s urban poor — is now a kingmaker in Iraqi politics. It’s a role that Sadr, the scion of a prominent clerical family, has been building toward since 2003. Immediately after the U.S. invasion, thousands of his supporters packed the dusty streets of Baghdad’s Saddam City neighborhood (later renamed Sadr City) for Friday prayers week after week. Sadr rallied their ranks around his parliamentary list in the 2005 elections, making a strong showing, and then used his political clout to help push Nouri al-Maliki into the prime minister slot in 2006. But the friendship didn’t last: Sadr bitterly split from Maliki when the latter allowed American troops to attack his militia members. Depending on whom you ask, Sadr either sensed he was next to be targeted and fled to Iran or was convinced of that fact by Iranian officials, who urged Sadr to leave for his own safety. Now, as U.S. troops withdraw and negotiations are underway in Baghdad to form a new government, Sadr may be planning his return. If he does, he will no doubt face jubilant crowds once again.
Sadr’s political comeback was the result of careful and deliberate planning. More than a year before the elections in March, Sadr and his top aides set up an election strategy committee they dubbed the "machine." The goal was to game the electoral system as best as they could. A team of seven pored over the election law, dissected district maps, and built an extensive database of voters in every province. In the end, Sadr’s Free Movement party won 39 seats in parliament, giving his followers a decisive vote within the National Iraqi Alliance, the dominant Shiite bloc of which they are part. And that’s exactly why Allawi shuttled to Damascus for the meeting: He needs Sadr if he hopes to become prime minister.

It would be easy to write off Sadr’s electoral success as a fluke. But the reality is that the cleric’s brand of religious nationalism, coupled with his carefully cultivated image as the defender of the Shiite community, has struck a deep chord with tens of thousands of Iraqis. Moreover, he’s got the one thing that his rivals don’t: "street cred." Sadr can, rightfully, claim that his movement is one of the few on the Iraqi political scene that’s homegrown. Compare this to the Sadrists’ top rivals in the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI). For years, they’ve tried to fight the image that they were brought in on American tanks and are beholden to both Washington and Tehran, even changing their name because the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq sounded too Iranian. They tried appropriating the image of Iraq’s most senior cleric, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, to woo more supporters (there are still posters up around Baghdad showing the late ISCI leaders Ayatollah Mohammad Baqer Hakim and Abdul Aziz Hakim beside Sistani). Nothing worked. ISCI got wiped out at the polls in March and also had a pretty dismal showing during provincial elections last year.
The Sadrists, by contrast, aren’t going anywhere — which puts Washington, among others, in a bind. Sadr’s supporters are more than just a political party. The cleric is clearly following the Hezbollah model, creating a populist political movement backed by a battle-hardened militia. The language Sadr uses when discussing the U.S. presence in Iraq — resistance, occupation, martyrdom — could easily have been taken from a speech by Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah. All this has discouraged U.S. officials from holding talks with Sadr — something they’ve never done since 2003. It’s not exactly like Sadr has gone out of his way to open up a dialogue, either. In fact, Sadr and many of his top aides have made it clear that the Mahdi Army won’t disarm as long as there are American troops on Iraqi soil.
So what does Sadr want? One issue that has come up again and again in the negotiations to form the government is detainees. In a recent interview with Al Jazeera, Sadr estimated that there are as many as 2,000 detainees linked to his movement, most swept up in U.S. operations in 2007 and 2008, whom he would like to see released. The cleric has claimedthat he doesn’t want to mix the issue of detainees with the negotiations to form the government, but representatives from major political blocs who have held talks with the Sadrists dispute that claim, noting that Sadr has blasted Maliki for holding the prisoners and withheld his support. No doubt whichever candidate Sadr ultimately backs for the premiership will have to make major concessions on the detainees. He may also have to promise to lay off the Mahdi Army.

But the detainees are only a short-term bargaining chip. What Sadr is after is power itself — and if his past record is any indication, he won’t be shy about using it. There are any number of issues he could block or help push through parliament. Sadr has previously butted heads with Kurdish groups about the final status of Kirkuk, an oil-rich city that the Kurds claim as their capital. He is a proponent of putting oil revenues under central government control, a position at odds with the Kurds as well as some rival Shiite groups, such as ISCI. Women’s rights groups have already voiced strong concerns that the Sadrists could block their attempts to reform laws that cover property ownership, divorce, and child custody. Some even fear that Mahdi fighters will again target women’s rights activists, as they did in Basra in 2007 and 2008.
Sadr’s ambitions don’t cover Iraq’s domestic agenda alone. His high-profile trips to Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere indicate that he wants to be seen as a prominent regional player. He would like to promote his Mahdi Army as a member of the so-called "axis of resistance" made up by Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which have made their names by confronting the United States and Israel.
For now, Sadr is undoubtedly pleased by his opportunity to have a key vote in who becomes the next prime minister. And it’s hard to miss the irony from a man who has built his image on being among the people ...

source​

 

[Thunderian]

Even if it does seem dated, let the neo-cons explain this, and watch them jump through the hoops of fire in the process ...

The King of Iraq
As U.S. troops leave the country, one man stands to benefit above all: Moqtada al-Sadr.
BY BABAK DEHGHANPISHEH | AUGUST 20, 2010, 9:24 PM

It would be hard to imagine a more unlikely meeting. Late in July, the tempestuous Iraqi Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr traveled to Damascus from Iran, where he’s been living in exile for the past three years. The trip looked at first to be a routine photo-op for Sadr and Syrian President Bashar Assad. That is, until Sadr met with Ayad Allawi, a top contender for the prime minister post in Iraq and one of the cleric’s sworn enemies. Their mutual enmity dates back to a showdown in the holy city of Najaf in the summer of 2004. Sadr’s Mahdi Army fighters had taken over the city and were using the Imam Ali shrine, one of the holiest sites for Shiites, as a base of operations. Allawi, who was interim prime minister at the time, gave American and Iraqi troops the green light to take them out, killing dozens of Mahdi militiamen in the process.

So it was no small thing for the two to meet in person. And they didn’t just talk; they were laughing and hamming it up as if they were the best of friends. The photos and video footage from that meeting are some of the only public examples of Sadr smiling (the more common profile is a scowling Sadr, wrapped in a white martyr’s shroud, pounding a pulpit). Sadr had good reason to be happy: He now holds the fate of his one-time enemy in his hands.
Sadr — feared by some, reviled by others and revered by a broad swath of Iraq’s urban poor — is now a kingmaker in Iraqi politics. It’s a role that Sadr, the scion of a prominent clerical family, has been building toward since 2003. Immediately after the U.S. invasion, thousands of his supporters packed the dusty streets of Baghdad’s Saddam City neighborhood (later renamed Sadr City) for Friday prayers week after week. Sadr rallied their ranks around his parliamentary list in the 2005 elections, making a strong showing, and then used his political clout to help push Nouri al-Maliki into the prime minister slot in 2006. But the friendship didn’t last: Sadr bitterly split from Maliki when the latter allowed American troops to attack his militia members. Depending on whom you ask, Sadr either sensed he was next to be targeted and fled to Iran or was convinced of that fact by Iranian officials, who urged Sadr to leave for his own safety. Now, as U.S. troops withdraw and negotiations are underway in Baghdad to form a new government, Sadr may be planning his return. If he does, he will no doubt face jubilant crowds once again.
Sadr’s political comeback was the result of careful and deliberate planning. More than a year before the elections in March, Sadr and his top aides set up an election strategy committee they dubbed the "machine." The goal was to game the electoral system as best as they could. A team of seven pored over the election law, dissected district maps, and built an extensive database of voters in every province. In the end, Sadr’s Free Movement party won 39 seats in parliament, giving his followers a decisive vote within the National Iraqi Alliance, the dominant Shiite bloc of which they are part. And that’s exactly why Allawi shuttled to Damascus for the meeting: He needs Sadr if he hopes to become prime minister.

It would be easy to write off Sadr’s electoral success as a fluke. But the reality is that the cleric’s brand of religious nationalism, coupled with his carefully cultivated image as the defender of the Shiite community, has struck a deep chord with tens of thousands of Iraqis. Moreover, he’s got the one thing that his rivals don’t: "street cred." Sadr can, rightfully, claim that his movement is one of the few on the Iraqi political scene that’s homegrown. Compare this to the Sadrists’ top rivals in the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI). For years, they’ve tried to fight the image that they were brought in on American tanks and are beholden to both Washington and Tehran, even changing their name because the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq sounded too Iranian. They tried appropriating the image of Iraq’s most senior cleric, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, to woo more supporters (there are still posters up around Baghdad showing the late ISCI leaders Ayatollah Mohammad Baqer Hakim and Abdul Aziz Hakim beside Sistani). Nothing worked. ISCI got wiped out at the polls in March and also had a pretty dismal showing during provincial elections last year.
The Sadrists, by contrast, aren’t going anywhere — which puts Washington, among others, in a bind. Sadr’s supporters are more than just a political party. The cleric is clearly following the Hezbollah model, creating a populist political movement backed by a battle-hardened militia. The language Sadr uses when discussing the U.S. presence in Iraq — resistance, occupation, martyrdom — could easily have been taken from a speech by Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah. All this has discouraged U.S. officials from holding talks with Sadr — something they’ve never done since 2003. It’s not exactly like Sadr has gone out of his way to open up a dialogue, either. In fact, Sadr and many of his top aides have made it clear that the Mahdi Army won’t disarm as long as there are American troops on Iraqi soil.
So what does Sadr want? One issue that has come up again and again in the negotiations to form the government is detainees. In a recent interview with Al Jazeera, Sadr estimated that there are as many as 2,000 detainees linked to his movement, most swept up in U.S. operations in 2007 and 2008, whom he would like to see released. The cleric has claimedthat he doesn’t want to mix the issue of detainees with the negotiations to form the government, but representatives from major political blocs who have held talks with the Sadrists dispute that claim, noting that Sadr has blasted Maliki for holding the prisoners and withheld his support. No doubt whichever candidate Sadr ultimately backs for the premiership will have to make major concessions on the detainees. He may also have to promise to lay off the Mahdi Army.

But the detainees are only a short-term bargaining chip. What Sadr is after is power itself — and if his past record is any indication, he won’t be shy about using it. There are any number of issues he could block or help push through parliament. Sadr has previously butted heads with Kurdish groups about the final status of Kirkuk, an oil-rich city that the Kurds claim as their capital. He is a proponent of putting oil revenues under central government control, a position at odds with the Kurds as well as some rival Shiite groups, such as ISCI. Women’s rights groups have already voiced strong concerns that the Sadrists could block their attempts to reform laws that cover property ownership, divorce, and child custody. Some even fear that Mahdi fighters will again target women’s rights activists, as they did in Basra in 2007 and 2008.
Sadr’s ambitions don’t cover Iraq’s domestic agenda alone. His high-profile trips to Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere indicate that he wants to be seen as a prominent regional player. He would like to promote his Mahdi Army as a member of the so-called "axis of resistance" made up by Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which have made their names by confronting the United States and Israel.
For now, Sadr is undoubtedly pleased by his opportunity to have a key vote in who becomes the next prime minister. And it’s hard to miss the irony from a man who has built his image on being among the people ...

source​

I had hoped that Sadr wasn’t as in the pocket of Iran as he was thought to be. There were rumours of coercion or of family members of Sadr being held by the Iranians.

I hoped at least that Sadr would be a peacemaker in Iraq, instead of an agitator, and it kind of looks like he has been.

Over the last couple of days he’s shut down his social media accounts, and announced that he’s closing his institutions. Some find this ominous, but I don’t know enough about the situation to have an opinion.

 

[Thunderian]

The following nations have signed a letter criticizing China’s treatment of Uighurs, including holding them in re-education camps.

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK.

The following countries not only refused to sign the aforementioned letter, but went out of their way to issue their own letter, praising China for their treatment of Muslims.

Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Gabon, Kuwait, Laos, Myanmar, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.

Why are supposed racist and Islamophobic countries doing more to stand up for Muslims in China than other Muslim countries are?

 

[DavidSon]

So far as I can see Islamic terrorism is at most a "fringe" phenomenon. If any major proportion of the world's vast Muslim population were terrorists then there would be a lot more going on than occasional attacks by "lone wolf" or small groups of radicalized people. I don't think that ISIS etc is wholly a phenomenon created by the CIA or whatever, maybe to a certain extent but undeniably there have also organically developed some extreme ideologies in the Middle East. Well, in fact this has a lot to do with all the West's wars for oil etc., so in that sense you could say it is really a product of the Occidental powers...

I do think that they are using the fear of Islamic terrorism, which gains vastly disproportional news coverage if you simply look at it in terms of the number of casualties, in order to make the population accept a surveillance state, the purposes behind which have little to do with "protecting" the public.

Not disagreeing but if you get time check this video. Corbett and Christian go through numerous motives and strategies of the US and Israel:

ISIS was Created, Funded and Armed by US/Israel and it's an Open Secret

 

[Artful Revealer]

Hi, after today’s general election results in the U.K. with Boris Johnson becoming our Prime Minister by a landslide, I am feeling very apathetic about the politics not just here but around the world. Every country is electing anti Muslim politicians and white nationalism is rising more than ever and genocides are occurring all over the world especially targeting Muslims . I don’t believe the General election results were genuine either and im just feeling worried about our future. What are your thoughts?

This was expected. It's the manifestation of the inevitable, that peoples of the West, through experience and empirical observation of the consequences of open-border policies, identity politics and minority empowerment, realise their priorities, which are national identity and sovereignty, and that their political representatives keep insisting on doing the exact opposite. This has been the dominating democratic expression for years and it strikes me that some people are still taken by surprise.

That said, the white nationalist, racist, xenophobic labels are propagandist tropes of the globalists to disguise the heart of the matter, that people no longer tolerate the antinational character of the globalist's political machinations and social engineering. Britain isn't Islamic, and the large majority of muslims aren't ethnically Britain. That statement alone seems sufficient to be deemed fascist, but ethnicity as a central component of a functioning society has been overlooked for too long. It's a natural force that can't be contained without political betrayal or oppression, therefore we will either move in the direction of a more ethnically oriented society (what the people want), or an ethnically oriented conflict (what our masters want).

 

[DavidSon]

This was expected. It's the manifestation of the inevitable, that peoples of the West, through experience and empirical observation of the consequences of open-border policies, identity politics and minority empowerment, realise their priorities, which are national identity and sovereignty, and that their political representatives keep insisting on doing the exact opposite. This has been the dominating democratic expression for years and it strikes me that some people are still taken by surprise.

That said, the white nationalist, racist, xenophobic labels are propagandist tropes of the globalists to disguise the heart of the matter, that people no longer tolerate the antinational character of the globalist's political machinations and social engineering. Britain isn't Islamic, and the large majority of muslims aren't ethnically Britain. That statement alone seems sufficient to be deemed fascist, but ethnicity as a central component of a functioning society has been overlooked for too long. It's a natural force that can't be contained without political betrayal or oppression, therefore we will either move in the direction of a more ethnically oriented society (what the people want), or an ethnically oriented conflict (what our masters want).

You're projecting your own white supremacist theories on the election in Britain. The populist movements that have risen in the developed world are a result of economic frustration and insecurity, produced by the same exploitation and globalism plaguing all of us. The driving issue in the UK was Brexit, which points to civic nationalism, not ethnic.

Up until the 18th century there were no borders in the world. Nations and the concept of nationhood arose to consolidate power over territories. It's an outdated political theory that is dying away. As human consciousness rises these antiquated notions will only be held by the scared and greedy spirits that promote their own form of eugenics and social engineering.

It's perverse to read the same obsession with race/ethnicity from a few of the posters here. How many threads do you have to pollute with your vile, racist ideology? It's astounding you don't understand how ugly and revolting your theories of humanity are to the outside world. Then you want to preach about Jesus Christ, what a flaming joke. The world is sick of white supremacy and every one of your idiotic theories. You're the social engineer, the hater, sowing discord among the children of God.

 

[Artful Revealer]

You're projecting your own white supremacist theories on the election in Britain. The populist movements that have risen in the developed world are a result of economic frustration and insecurity, produced by the same exploitation and globalism plaguing all of us. The driving issue in the UK was Brexit, which points to civic nationalism, not ethnic.

Up until the 18th century there were no borders in the world. Nations and the concept of nationhood arose to consolidate power over territories. It's an outdated political theory that is dying away. As human consciousness rises these antiquated notions will only be held by the scared and greedy spirits that promote their own form of eugenics and social engineering.

It's perverse to read the same obsession with race/ethnicity from a few of the posters here. How many threads do you have to pollute with your vile, racist ideology? It's astounding you don't understand how ugly and revolting your theories of humanity are to the outside world. Then you want to preach about Jesus Christ, what a flaming joke. The world is sick of white supremacy and every one of your idiotic theories. You're the social engineer, the hater, sowing discord among the children of God.

You react in the typically over-dramatic predisposed fashion we've been taught for decades. We've been taught that differences between ethnic groups are only conditional, environmental etc. and that we should ignore the actual ethnicity and respective culture. Civic nationalism is for many the lukewarm expression of an underlying truth. It just takes you longer to notice. You say it's because of economic frustration and security, and both are inextricably tied to mass immigration (although not only that).

Nothing I said alludes to supremacy, let alone "white" supremacy. You've been conditioned to read that into it. White is not an ethnicity. English is an ethnicity. Irish. Scottish. Ethnicity is tied to nation. Ethnos means "band of people living together, nation, people, tribe, caste", it means "adopted to the genius or customs of a people, peculiar to a people". Nation means "a group of people with common ancestry and language". Common ancestry and language are essential since it's the combination of these that facilitates the transmission of cultural values, norms, traditions, etc. It's how a society stabilizes. You say nations are a recent phenomenon, but the borders drawn, with some exceptions, generally follow those definitions. If you're in France, you'll speak French. You cross the border south and you'll speak Spanish. You cross a border, the ethnicity changes.

You say ethnic nationalism is outdated. I say it'll come back strong because it's an undeniable part of being human. It's anthropological. It's human nature that now has been suppressed for too long by oligarchs who only care about one ethnicity, the rest be damned. You have claimed moral high ground and waved your flag of moral supremacy, but in reality you are the product of a mind that is not your own. Call me a devil, I care not. It's but the outcry of someone who doesn't want to face reality. It's coming from a place of emotion, not reason. Society shouldn't be run by emotion, but reason.

 

[shankara]

It’s called terrorism for a reason. No one wants to be stabbed walking to the store or to work or recently the people stabbed in London were coming out of a conference....it goes to show that that can happen to anyone anywhere..makes people edgy. And people don’t want to celebrate the holidays or go to festivals and have to be on the lookout for a person driving their car through the crowds..or women having to fight off a sexual attack. Especially when most of these countries were to the point that they could walk peacefully enough on their streets, go to festivals and as women be aware..but not really worry so much...now it’s that could be us tonight.

I'm just saying that it's not such a widespread phenomenon that we need to be living in fear. Also we should question whose agenda such fear actually serves.

Also that you certainly can't draw any conclusions about Islam as a whole from the actions of a very small minority.

Would perhaps be interesting to compare the number of people killed in terrorist attacks with civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Orwell's mentor]

You react in the typically over-dramatic predisposed fashion we've been taught for decades. We've been taught that differences between ethnic groups are only conditional, environmental etc. and that we should ignore the actual ethnicity and respective culture. Civic nationalism is for many the lukewarm expression of an underlying truth. It just takes you longer to notice. You say it's because of economic frustration and security, and both are inextricably tied to mass immigration (although not only that).

Nothing I said alludes to supremacy, let alone "white" supremacy. You've been conditioned to read that into it. White is not an ethnicity. English is an ethnicity. Irish. Scottish. Ethnicity is tied to nation. Ethnos means "band of people living together, nation, people, tribe, caste", it means "adopted to the genius or customs of a people, peculiar to a people". Nation means "a group of people with common ancestry and language". Common ancestry and language are essential since it's the combination of these that facilitates the transmission of cultural values, norms, traditions, etc. It's how a society stabilizes. You say nations are a recent phenomenon, but the borders drawn, with some exceptions, generally follow those definitions. If you're in France, you'll speak French. You cross the border south and you'll speak Spanish. You cross a border, the ethnicity changes.

You say ethnic nationalism is outdated. I say it'll come back strong because it's an undeniable part of being human. It's anthropological. It's human nature that now has been suppressed for too long by oligarchs who only care about one ethnicity, the rest be damned. You have claimed moral high ground and waved your flag of moral supremacy, but in reality you are the product of a mind that is not your own. Call me a devil, I care not. It's but the outcry of someone who doesn't want to face reality. It's coming from a place of emotion, not reason. Society shouldn't be run by emotion, but reason.

This post brings this picture meme to mind:

 

[Artful Revealer]

Yes, another popular cliché of the millennial narrative. I would have to infer from your meme that you have absolutely no problem with the population replacement that occurred to the Native Americans?

 

[Orwell's mentor]

Yes, another popular cliché of the millennial narrative. I would have to infer from your meme that you have absolutely no problem with the population replacement that occurred to the Native Americans?

Wrong generation, bub... wrong generation. I also have Aboriginal heritage so I have no idea what you're inferring, as I'm well aware of it.

 

[Artful Revealer]

Wrong generation, bub... wrong generation. I also have Aboriginal heritage so I have no idea what you're inferring, as I'm well aware of it.

You don't necessarily have to be part of a generation to espouse the narrative. But it started with the boomers, so I guess my targeting was too narrow, I admit.

I'll take it then, that, speaking from a the pov of an aboriginal, you deem nothing wrong with the gradual replacement and eventual disintegration of a people and their way of life?

 

[Orwell's mentor]

You don't necessarily have to be part of a generation to espouse the narrative. But it started with the boomers, so I guess my targeting was too narrow, I admit.

I'll take it then, that, speaking from a the pov of an aboriginal, you deem nothing wrong with the gradual replacement and eventual disintegration of a people and their way of life?

You're comparing apples and oranges. Generally speaking, the Aboriginals' way of life was/is decimated by aggressive European colonization, while the places where the majority of Muslims live are now being destroyed by the ruling elite and have to live somewhere that's habitable. Now that there's an influx of them moving to various countries throughout Europe and North America, the people who's homes and way of life are obliterated are the to blame? And that remedies what, exactly? Please don't answer, it's a rhetorical question.

If you're unable to see the bigger picture, that's fine because these views are very prevalent throughout these forums, much like another meme that's posted here.

You to your way, and me to mine.

 

[Artful Revealer]

You're comparing apples and oranges. Generally speaking, the Aboriginals' way of life was/is decimated by aggressive European colonization, while the places where the majority of Muslims live are now being destroyed by the ruling elite and have to live somewhere that's habitable. Now that there's an influx of them moving to various countries throughout Europe and North America, the people who's homes and way of life are obliterated are the to blame? And that remedies what, exactly? Please don't answer, it's a rhetorical question.

If you're unable to see the bigger picture, that's fine because these views are very prevalent throughout these forums, much like another meme that's posted here.

You to your way, and me to mine.

While your question might've been rhetorical, mine wasn't. I'd like a straight answer.