The failure of Liberalism (Regressive left) to deal with Islam

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

So, Itse, still think this isn't a problem? From what you've seen of how I look at the world, does Crumpy-Gunt's description there sum up my world view pretty accurately, would you say? Or Nik's, Thor's, Peter12's, Cliff's?

I know, I know, he's just one guy. But seriously, it's like he's intentionally playing a role here.

I totally am intentionally playing a role here. The role of the dude who has lived in the Middle East for over a decade. Studied political science for years and has had a real life experience with thousands of Muslims and also my fair share of right wing d-bags who love to generalize but hate being generalized.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

I totally am intentionally playing a role here. The role of the dude who has lived in the Middle East for over a decade. Studied political science for years and has had a real life experience with thousands of Muslims and also my fair share of right wing d-bags who love to generalize but hate being generalized.

Thousands of Muslims, really?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Itse

The extreme right does not talk about about issues WITHIN Islam. They talk about issues WITH Islam. That's a pretty huge distinction.

So, can you expand on this? What is this huge distinction? Is there something inherently wrong with discussing the issues with an ideology?

I feel like you're expressing this incorrectly because I don't see a huge distinction. We can freely discuss issues with Christianity, Communism, corporate capitalism and facism.

How are you defining with and within. If there are components of an ideology you dislike, you have issue with that ideology. It doesn't require blanket condemnation (even if some do take it to that point, which I don't feel anyone here is).

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by nik-

Haha I was trying to remember where I saw this poster and I remembered it was when he had his last meltdown in the north Korea nuke test thread.

This makes it more awesome. This dude is convinced he's the smartest mofo around.

Probably my new favourite poster.

If pwning a bunch of idiots (yourself included) who think it was justified to drop a nuke on Hiroshima and Nagasaki where innocent civilians lived is a meltdown....then I had a meltdown. If calling a bunch of snobby islamophobic fear mongerers out on the underlying cause of their bigotry is a meltdown - then sure - I'm having another one .

If you think I'm convinced I'm smarter than anyone in this thread because I'm trolling a bunch of youtube conspiracy theory watching alpha bros who use terms like SJW and regressive left...sure. PS you contribute jack all. You are like a cheerleader for these right wingers. lol

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

If pwning a bunch of idiots (yourself included) who think it was justified to drop a nuke on Hiroshima and Nagasaki where innocent civilians lived is a meltdown....then I had a meltdown. If calling a bunch of snobby islamophobic fear mongerers out on the underlying cause of their bigotry is a meltdown - then sure - I'm having another one .

If you think I'm convinced I'm smarter than anyone in this thread because I'm trolling a bunch of youtube conspiracy theory watching alpha bros who use terms like SJW and regressive left...sure. PS you contribute jack all. You are like a cheerleader for these right wingers. lol

Haha, you didn't "pwn" anything in that thread. You just embarrassed yourself. Kind of like you're doing now.

The lack of self awareness is hilarious.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by peter12

Thousands of Muslims, really?

Yes really Peter12. I've had the chance to know a few thousand people in my life. I'm outgoing and I've also traveled a lot. Im not some loser whos in his mums basement starting silly threads about a clash of civilizations. Meeting people is apart of my job. When I lived in the ME - 90% of those people I met were Muslim. So yes. Ive met, gotten to know and gauged thousands of people who happened to be Muslim.

Let me guess...you cant conceptualize someone meeting thousands of people.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

So, Itse, still think this isn't a problem?

Let's say that I don't think it's a significant problem. It's just one guy, and while his manners are not great (seriously Crumpy-Gunt, get a grip), he's got about as many points as is the general level of discussion here.

From what you've seen of how I look at the world, does Crumpy-Gunt's description there sum up my world view pretty accurately, would you say? Or Nik's, Thor's, Peter12's, Cliff's?

(I do actually seriously consider the possibility that Crumpy-Gunt is playing a role here. The timing and manner in which he entered the discussion just seems super convenient.)

Thing is, I don't really care whether or not someone represents your opinions accurately. You're here, people can read your opinions for themselves and decide for themselves. While you're claiming that it's terrible for discussion, I don't see it having much of an effect on anyone. All the same people are still talking as far as I've noticed.

As for Crumpy-Gunt, maybe if you had tried the bleeding heart liberal approach of responding to aggression with non-aggression (instead of passive-aggression like you're doing now), you might have gotten a discussion out of him.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

So this guy apparently legitimately has something seriously wrong with him? Did we just pick a fight with the political equivalent of springs1? This is awkward.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by nik-

Haha, you didn't "pwn" anything in that thread. You just embarrassed yourself. Kind of like you're doing now.

The lack of self awareness is hilarious.

I literally dont care what a bunch of right wing flames fans think of me. If they think its embarrasing that I dont think those nukes should have been dropped or I have an issue with bigotry and double standards.

I didnt post here to be a nice dude or sound smart like some of you dudes. You are a goof and you have failed to make me regret anything I typed.

"oh dood you embarrassed yourself, your lack of self awareness is hilarious, omfg isnt this the guy who had a meltdown in the hiroshima thread because he thought that was wrong and those ppl were innocent civilians.."

If anyone should be embarrassed its you for being such a brown nosing fool who literally adds nothing to this discussion. I am not surprised you have that little 'dont tread on me' snake - you seem like the NRA/Nascar type anyhow.

[nik-]

Haha, this is awesome.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Whatever. This team has been crying out for a right winger anyway.

Gaudreau - Monahan - Thor/Nik-/Corsi/Peter12

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

Yes really Peter12. I've had the chance to know a few thousand people in my life. I'm outgoing and I've also traveled a lot. Im not some loser whos in his mums basement starting silly threads about a clash of civilizations. Meeting people is apart of my job. When I lived in the ME - 90% of those people I met were Muslim. So yes. Ive met, gotten to know and gauged thousands of people who happened to be Muslim.

Let me guess...you cant conceptualize someone meeting thousands of people.

That's cool, man. Sounds like you've had an interesting life.

[TheScorpion]

I hadn't had any reason to enter this thread before, but...

Holy hell, you guys, this thread.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

I literally dont care what a bunch of right wing flames fans think of me. If they think its embarrasing that I dont think those nukes should have been dropped or I have an issue with bigotry and double standards.

I didnt post here to be a nice dude or sound smart like some of you dudes. You are a goof and you have failed to make me regret anything I typed.

"oh dood you embarrassed yourself, your lack of self awareness is hilarious, omfg isnt this the guy who had a meltdown in the hiroshima thread because he thought that was wrong and those ppl were innocent civilians.."

If anyone should be embarrassed its you for being such a brown nosing fool who literally adds nothing to this discussion. I am not surprised you have that little 'dont tread on me' snake - you seem like the NRA/Nascar type anyhow.

It is weird that you are still here.

[nik-]

It makes me sad to think about how many people must miss the joke in my Gadsden flag avatar.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by peter12

It is weird that you are still here.

It is weird that you posted in response to me 2 times in 5 minutes...and I didnt say anthing in between. I think you guys need/love the excitement of Crumpy and his 'meltdowns' in your lives. You're welcome

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Ok Itse left the thread, its full of RWers and Scorpion is now in here. I'm out before he somehow finds a way to bring up David Jones.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by nik-

So, can you expand on this? What is this huge distinction? Is there something inherently wrong with discussing the issues with an ideology?

It was mentioned before in the article Thor linked that I quoted.

Islam is a religion. It's a much more complex thing than ideology. In fact, within Islam you can have two completely contradicting ideologies.

Islamism is an ideology that Islam should rule the society. They're as much a political movement as they are a religious one. Secular Muslims are their polar opposite.

To generalize, if you use problems of Islamism as representative of all of Islam, you are doing exactly what the secular Muslims are begging you don't do. You are essentially wiping moderate, secular Muslims completely out of sight, as if they don't even exist.

It's kind of like talking about the US as if Sanders and Clinton and Obama and Trump all have the same problems (that are fundamentally related to them being Americans).

It's also important to remember that not all Islamists are violent. Some are pretty much the Muslim equivalent of GOP religious right. Not great for the society if you ask me, but a legitimate part of it, perfectly capable of respecting democractic processes, and certainly not terrorists, or even supporters of terrorism.

I think it's perfectly okay to bash Islamists in general though, and I do think they're in part to blame for extremist terrorism. I also think the doomsday preachers within GOP should take responsibility for some of the right wing terrorism in US.

I feel like you're expressing this incorrectly because I don't see a huge distinction. We can freely discuss issues with Christianity, Communism, corporate capitalism and facism.

Christianity is not the same as those others. Again, Christianity is not an ideology. It's a lot more complex thing, to the point where I don't really see much point in discussing "problems with Christianity". It's at best of historical interest at this point anyway, Christianity has become such a wide spread of ideologies and movements. Same with Islam.

Communism, fascism, corporate capitalism, those make much more sense as singular things to talk about.

How are you defining with and within. If there are components of an ideology you dislike, you have issue with that ideology. It doesn't require blanket condemnation (even if some do take it to that point, which I don't feel anyone here is).

A blanket condemnation is exactly the difference. The extreme right discusses the problematic parts of Islam with the purpose of dehumanizing and ostracizing all Muslims and creating the storyline of "clash of civilizations" that serves their political interests.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Thor

Silenced is a bad word, disliked by many of his fellow Muslims, and many of his fellow Liberals, loved by Conservatives. He created the term the Regressive left because how much backlash his direct and honest response to problems within Islam in the west and wanting to face it and try to have real dialogue. That should be championed by fellow liberals, but many of us have become afraid to speak about Islam critically for fear of sounding like the right wing who attack Islam on much harsher grounds.

I don't think that this is quite accurate. As I understand it, Nawaz coined the term "regressive left" to describe the difficulties posed by moral relativism (as an academic or scientific position) for political discourse. Anthropologists do not make for effective or useful political commentators.

That is an interesting but not at all widespread problem. For example, I seriously doubt that anyone who posts on this forum could be described as a moral relativist. Noam Chomsky is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a moral relativist.

Now, "regressive left" has really just become a snarl word applied to people that one disagrees with (it seems to me anyway.)

EDIT: And just for the record, I think that Nawaz is a very intelligent, serious, and interesting thinker.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

So this guy apparently legitimately has something seriously wrong with him? Did we just pick a fight with the political equivalent of springs1? This is awkward.

Wow. The champion of rational, reasoned debate is reduced to name calling.

Amazing.