The New American Politics thread

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Empirical analysis is all well and good, but it has to have parameters and limitations, otherwise you end up with something like eugenics or

Yeah, but at least we'll use empiricism to get us out of the damaging policies we used to ourselves into them...eventually.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

I'm probably going to sound like a dick asking this question but actually I'm sincerely interested.

Do you hold a personal, heartfelt belief in any of the topics being discussed?

It strikes me that you approach each issue or discussion from almost a purely intellectual, analytical POV.

He's a lawyer. There's like an 80% chance he's a sociopath

[Senator Clay Davis]

Anytime I see some Trump supporter say he's definitely winning next year, I wonder how they think a guy who 60% of the country views unfavorably (and 45% very unfavorably) can win a general election. Muslims are more favorably viewed even...



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-donald-trump/

[Looch City]

^ And furthermore:

"Prime Minister Netanyahu rejects Donald Trump's recent remarks about Muslims," according to a statement issued by the prime minister's office.

"The State of Israel respects all religions and strictly guarantees the rights of all its citizens. At the same time, Israel is fighting against militant Islam that targets Muslims, Christians and Jews alike and threatens the entire world," the statement said.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/10/politi...rip/index.html

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

also the minute you use the word racism to describe intolerance for a certain religious group. It must be hard for neo liberals to stand up for religious rights..

I take issue with people pulling the "islam isn't a race" argument in order to mask genuine racism.

How many people who are in favor of Trump's ridiculous ban on muslim's would probably just view it as an opportunity to ostracize brown people generally? I think you would have to admit that at least some, if not many would. That is the typical caricature view of a "muslim" by a racist or bigot anyways. They can't differentiate between a muslim, sikh, hindu, or even a christian arab. Do you think Trumps bigoted supporters would even make the slightest attempt to make a distinction? Or that they even care about criticizing the ideas in islam without vilifying entire ethnicities?

I'm all for calling out the "regressive left" where they fall short on criticism of islam, but to deny that racism plays a role in the conversation as well is ignorant. Yes, in theory you should be able to criticize Islam without assigning a viewpoint on anyone of any particular race or ethnicity. The problem is, actual racists don't do that, and even non racists probably view mulsims primarily as brown skinned, Arabic people. So you need people playing the racism card too -- it genuinely exists in some cases.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I take issue with people pulling the "islam isn't a race" argument in order to mask genuine racism.

How many people who are in favor of Trump's ridiculous ban on muslim's would probably just view it as an opportunity to ostracize brown people generally? I think you would have to admit that at least some, if not many would. That is the typical caricature view of a "muslim" by a racist or bigot anyways. They can't differentiate between a muslim, sikh, hindu, or even a christian arab. Do you think Trumps bigoted supporters would even make the slightest attempt to make a distinction? Or that they even care about criticizing the ideas in islam without vilifying entire ethnicities?

I'm all for calling out the "regressive left" where they fall short on criticism of islam, but to deny that racism plays a role in the conversation as well is ignorant. Yes, in theory you should be able to criticize Islam without assigning a viewpoint on anyone of any particular race or ethnicity. The problem is, actual racists don't do that, and even non racists probably view mulsims primarily as brown skinned, Arabic people. So you need people playing the racism card too -- it genuinely exists in some cases.

I definitely agree that many people, certainly the majority of Trump supporters, mask their racism towards "Muslim looking" people through fake concerns over their religion. A lot of them are extremely ignorant of other middle eastern religions as you mention, just look at the idiot who shot up the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin thinking he was attacking Muslims.

However I also think that the thin separation works the other way when you have people like Sam Harris opining on the dangers of literalist Islam and getting shouted down as being racist. I think that enlightened people having these conversations need to use the correct terms and hope there's a trickle down effect of better dialogue. The desired effect of calling out actual racists gets diluted when too many people toss out the term when its not applicable.

[northcrunk]

Islam is not a race. Fact.
Race is a myth. We are all the same race/species.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

I definitely agree that many people, certainly the majority of Trump supporters, mask their racism towards "Muslim looking" people through fake concerns over their religion. A lot of them are extremely ignorant of other middle eastern religions as you mention, just look at the idiot who shot up the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin thinking he was attacking Muslims.

However I also think that the thin separation works the other way when you have people like Sam Harris opining on the dangers of literalist Islam and getting shouted down as being racist. I think that enlightened people having these conversations need to use the correct terms and hope there's a trickle down effect of better dialogue. The desired effect of calling out actual racists gets diluted when too many people toss out the term when its not applicable.

I agree.

I agree with a lot of what Harris says (not all of it), but the area I think he and other "new atheists" (whatever that is) people fall short, is shouting down the actual bigots that are perhaps latching onto their arguments as ammunition. They are too busy trying to win the religious argument that they forget to also attack the legitimate bigotry that seems to be festering. They forget that not everyone is as educated and intellectually capable of making the critical arguments they are, but are still in on the conversation, with views that are less than constructive.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Islam is not a race. Fact.
Race is a myth. We are all the same race/species.

Technically correct, practically out to lunch.

Racism and bigotry exist, and people's perceptions of race is a very real thing.

[nik-]

I'm just kind of bored of legitimate criticism of a ####ty religion (yes, not the only one) being trumped by the "Islamaphobia" card being constantly played.

Racism exists. Criticism of Islam isn't inherently racist. It reminds me of certain posters slapping the anti-semite label on anyone who criticizes Israeli policy.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I agree.

I agree with a lot of what Harris says (not all of it), but the area I think he and other "new atheists" (whatever that is) people fall short, is shouting down the actual bigots that are perhaps latching onto their arguments as ammunition. They are too busy trying to win the religious argument that they forget to also attack the legitimate bigotry that seems to be festering. They forget that not everyone is as educated and intellectually capable of making the critical arguments they are, but are still in on the conversation, with views that are less than constructive.

I get annoyed with Harris and his ilk because I don't them to be very constructive. He seems hellbent on getting everyone to recognize that Islam is the worst of the worst as far as religions go. Even if that were the case, what is the end game of such an argument?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I get annoyed with Harris and his ilk because I don't them to be very constructive. He seems hellbent on getting everyone to recognize that Islam is the worst of the worst as far as religions go. Even if that were the case, what is the end game of such an argument?

Putting whether it's the worst aside, it's much like racism in America. A problem needs to be accepted as present before you can start working on it.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I get annoyed with Harris and his ilk because I don't them to be very constructive. He seems hellbent on getting everyone to recognize that Islam is the worst of the worst as far as religions go. Even if that were the case, what is the end game of such an argument?

I can't speak for Harris obviously, but I would venture to guess he thinks he's tackling the problem of why radicalization is such a problem in islam, and perhaps fostering a discussion that could lead to more self reflection or reform in the Islamic world? I haven't read his last book he wrote with Maajid Nawaz but I'm guessing its along those lines.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nik-

I'm just kind of bored of legitimate criticism of a ####ty religion (yes, not the only one) being trumped by the "Islamaphobia" card being constantly played.

Racism exists. Criticism of Islam isn't inherently racist. It reminds me of certain posters slapping the anti-semite label on anyone who criticizes Israeli policy.

Fair enough. I've just not seen any convincing argument on why I should have more contempt more Islamic doctrine or fundamentalist Muslims than I should have for Christian doctrine and evangelicals.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I can't speak for Harris obviously, but I would venture to guess he thinks he's tackling the problem of why radicalization is such a problem in islam, and perhaps fostering a discussion that could lead to more self reflection or reform in the Islamic world? I haven't read his last book he wrote with Maajid Nawaz but I'm guessing its along those lines.

Yeah, I'm just not sure how effective that is coming from an atheist. The link that CHL posted a few posts up is a good example of Muslims attempting to reform the religion in a more moderate and modern way.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Fair enough. I've just not seen any convincing argument on why I should have more contempt more Islamic doctrine or fundamentalist Muslims than I should have for Christian doctrine and evangelicals.

I don't think its a need for more or less contempt (they are both ridiculous), but maybe more focus. The natural argument would be that fundamentalist muslims are committing a lot more violent acts of terror in the world at the moment. I think people are genuinely wondering whats at the root of it.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nik-

Putting whether it's the worst aside, it's much like racism in America. A problem needs to be accepted as present before you can start working on it.

Well part of the problem, in my opinion, is that we keep allowing certain States *cough*Saudi Arabia*cough* to get away with perpetuating the extremist elements because we see them as strategic allies. It's really hard for the West to attempt to take the moral high ground when they're constantly in bed with brutal regimes.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Fair enough. I've just not seen any convincing argument on why I should have more contempt more Islamic doctrine or fundamentalist Muslims than I should have for Christian doctrine and evangelicals.

On a literal by the book comparison, you really shouldn't (however, I will say that the New Testament is relatively tame, the Old Testament is garbage imo). I think where the issue comes is that Islam, from the mouths of muslim friends, treats itself as the solution to everything. Not just the religious aspect, but financial and political. It also claims it is the last and final word, which obviously leads to the infidel issue. I think equal contempt for the fundamentalists on both sides is reasonable, it's just that the violence count is so stacked towards one side that it's a little disingenuous.

Islam needs it's Age of Enlightenment and for that to even start it needs honest self reflection and an acceptance that its ideas are not infallible.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I don't think its a need for more or less contempt (they are both ridiculous), but maybe more focus. The natural argument would be that fundamentalist muslims are committing a lot more violent acts of terror in the world at the moment. I think people are genuinely wondering whats at the root of it.

Clash of civilizations due to increased globalization?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well part of the problem, in my opinion, is that we keep allowing certain States *cough*Saudi Arabia*cough* to get away with perpetuating the extremist elements because we see them as strategic allies. It's really hard for the West to attempt to take the moral high ground when they're constantly in bed with brutal regimes.

I don't disagree. KSA is a piece of ####, and yet what happens when we let them implode? Iraq and Libya will look like a walk in the park. That's not the reason we're doing it, obviously, but as much as I'd like to see that place get its justice for the garbage it's spread over the world in the last 40 years, it would be a pretty bad scene.