Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
7 years ago  ::  Nov 30, 2007 - 5:45PM #11
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,156
What is  the problem of " islamofacsism"?

fas·cism Pronunciation: \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\ Function: noun Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces Date: 1921 1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control fascism and brutality

Is·lam Pronunciation: \is-ˈläm, iz-, -ˈlam, ˈis-ˌ, ˈiz-ˌ\ Function: noun Etymology: Arabic islām submission (to the will of God) Date: 1817 1: the religious faith of Muslims including belief in Allah as the sole deity and in Muhammad as his prophet2 a: the civilization erected upon Islamic faith   b: the group of modern nations in which Islam is the dominant religion
— Is·lam·ic \is-ˈlä-mik, iz-, -ˈla-\ adjective
— Is·lam·ics\-miks\ noun plural but singular or plural in construction

  The word  isalmo facsist  is an oxymoron.   It is liken unto a god fearing atheist,  a faithful agnostic,  an apathetic partisian.   An athestist may usetehword god and appeal to your belief but will not believe,  an agnostic maybe tenacious , and a partisian requires comittment.   A facsist will use religioin to gain control but his cause is greater. Islam requires submissioin to Allah not submission to a state or a man.  This is some of my problems with theterm in question.
“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Nov 30, 2007 - 10:59PM #12
Erey
Posts: 18,738
Fod,
you are picking and choosing according to whim:

merican Heritage Dictionary -
fas·cism       (fāsh'ĭz'əm)  Pronunciation Key
n. 

   1. often Fascism
         1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
         2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
   2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.


How exactly is this different?  Controls, suppression, terror, censorship, easy to substitute belligernet nationalism and racism seemlessly into belligerent religiosity.  Is it so radicaly different?  Aryans are better than jews.  Muslims are superior in every way to non-muslims and Sunnis are superior to Shites or other groups.  Not different, not less belligerent.  Same structure of mythology. 

And YES it is a philosophy based on advocating a system of goveremnte.

and YES it is oppressive, dictatorial.

SHOW ME WHERE THE OTHER!

Again, never called all of Islam fascist - Again a distinction'


And once more - I really don't care what term you prefer.  Islamo-fascism in no way shape or form commits all muslims to fascism and it is hardly inappropriate

Further - this whole white guilt semantic discussion is nothing more than bullshit to get in the way of heaven forbid aknowledging that we have a real issue within Islam a real movement.

When will people feel comfortable in admiting that?  We are like how many posts into this thread and most of you people just can't do it.  You can talk about everything else BUT

So I really don't care what your term of preference is. But the fact remains we have a global movement on our hands an ideology that is dangerous and is based on Islam.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Dec 01, 2007 - 12:57AM #13
eadler
Posts: 4,449
Erey,

There is no question that we are dealing with some countries where people are ignorant, tribal,  insular and where religious fundamentalism, combined with a political motivations results in idiotic seeming events like the Sudanese teddy bear debacle.

Religion is a part of it, but the politics in all this should not be underestimated. The NY Times article on this incident today mentioned that the Sudanese government is using this incident to delay the introduction of the UN peace keeping force. It has asked to exclude the scandanavian contingent because of the newspaper cartoons lampooning the prophet Mohammed, and now this. The Sudanese government sent their employees out to demonstrate against too light a sentence. That way they can say the bucked popular demand, and also say that this is areason why Scandanavian peacekeepers should not be used.

My opposition to focusing on Islam as the enemy religion, in the face of incidents like this, does not arise from any  sense of white guilt at all. It is a product of pragmatism. Castigating Islam as the source of the trouble is wrongheaded. It is the [b}abuse of Islam[/b], by the people, that stir up this trouble, that is the problem. Islam is not a monolithic religion, like the Catholic church, and there are leaders in it who are bad apples as well as good ones. Most of its precepts are similar to Christianity. Charity and righteousness are prized. Islam has not had the moderating influence of the enlightenment that changed the ideals of  Christian Europe, and the United States.

If this point were made clearly, it would be more possible for the moderate sensible leaders of Islam to stop the abuse of the religion. If we say Islam is at fault, it implies that we are asking people to abandon their religion, which they clearly won't do. We do nothing to strengthen the moderates leaders in Islam, and help them to steer their religion in the right direction, which is the right thing to do under the circumstances.

You actually aid recruitment of Islamic radicals if you claim that they represent Islam. You also say that you are against them, so you are against Islam.  It makes them look like defenders of Islam.

If you look at a country like Pakistan, which is composed of different ethnic groups, Indian Muslims with a very secular modern outlook, who are moderate muslims, and othe more tribal ethnic groups like the Pashtun, you can see that our policy has failed. The moderates have nothing in common with the radicals, but because they view the US as anti muslim, they prefer the radicals.

In addition, instead of helping Pakistan to become more secular and modern, by aiding public education, we sit back and let the Saudi Arabian funded madrassas train the young men of Pakistan to become Islamic fundamentalists. We focus our efforts on aiding the military in Pakistan, which has taken over the country and has made it into a dictatorship.

There is no white guilt involved in my thought process at all.
It is pure pragmatism, and revulsion against a stupid and counterproductive policy called the "War on Terror".

Does this make sense to you? I have made this point in different words many times, but it doesn't seem to have resulted in any real discussion of its merits. Maybe this time it will.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Dec 01, 2007 - 1:03AM #14
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,156
Hugo Chavez is a Catholic, He recently asked  Venezuelans to pray for Castro.  HEis friend of Iran, Venezuela in a member of OPEC.  He  is trying to establish himself as a dictator for life, is influencing South American countries to re evaluate their relationship  with  the US.  He threatens a large portioin of the US oil supply, has criticized  Columbia for its helping the US .   In some way he acts likea facsist, but is not islamic, but  may be a bigger threat  to the US than Iraq.  I have no White guilt because I have African american and Cherokee relatives.
“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Dec 01, 2007 - 2:22AM #15
rangerken
Posts: 16,408
I have no white guilt and to the best of my knowledge my ancestry is 100% european. The whole guilt trip thing is politically correct garbage.

I agree that Islam the religion is not our enemy. Radical Islamists most certainly ARE however. Whereas we should be careful not to lump all of Islam and all muslims together, it is thoroughly appropriate tyo call the enemy what he calls himself, which is always Islamist something or other relqated.

Ken
Libertarian, Conservative, Life member of the NRA and VFW
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Dec 01, 2007 - 8:35AM #16
eadler
Posts: 4,449
Erey,

But here we have a society where many people feel this way and take to the streets. We have seen it over and again. Not just in the Sudan but in Saudi, Pakistan, Palestine, even in europe.



All of these represent separate problems that require individually crafted solutions. They have a political and social, as well as a religious component. They cannot be addressed with a generalized category like Islamicism, Islamo-fascisme or "War on Terror". These terms indicate that one is following a strategy that is counter productive.

Terrorism experts have pointed this out over and over again,
but certain politicians who use the emotion of fear to gain political power ignore this reality.

Please get off the white guilt hobby horse and deal with the real world.

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Dec 03, 2007 - 10:51AM #17
Mubzxay
Posts: 193
In regards to the first post…

“”””””””””””””””At what point can we A. Aknowledge a problem”””””””””””

.There has always been problems in most countries that have a mostly muslim Population, I’m not saying that those two factors are correlated…but lets’ take Pakistan as an example….when has that country EVER been stable? Is the only cause of  Pakistan’s endemic instability religion?


“”””””””””””””””B. hold the people within it responsible””””””””””””””””

Who is responsible for whatever problems? In my opinion in most cases it’s the people in power…regardless of any other factor….


“””””””””””””””””””C. stop finding other scape goats to assauge our white guilt?”””””””””””””””


No comment….i’m not Anglo....

(and I’m out of time)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Dec 04, 2007 - 5:06PM #18
piecesofthewhole
Posts: 1,380
Eadler, I think you make some excellent points.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Dec 04, 2007 - 10:54PM #19
Whisperingal
Posts: 25,009
Eadler--your post 13 is a jewel of rational thought married to specific facts.

I wish everyone who talks about "Islamo-fascism" or "Worldwide War on Terror"--including GW--could read and understand exactly how complex the situations around the world are.

Keep at it Eadler--you are a light in the sometimes deep darkness of the current administration and the unthinking and fearful atmosphere it is trying to create.

Thank you for your work here.
WGal
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook