General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIt's really, really hard to talk about radical Islamic terrorism
Those engaging in it are a tiny, tiny minority of Muslims. Those supporting it, although a larger group are still a small minority. There are something like 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. I fear the demonization of Muslims that could lead to horrific attacks on innocent people. But that doesn't mean that it isn't a real problem. So how to address it?
Is there anything currently analogous within any other major religion? No, there really isn't it. So much of it seems to me to be blowback related. I'm not excusing it, but that's a big factor. U.S. and western interference and actions in the Mideast and other Muslim nations have created the perfect environment for the fomentation of hate and violent lashing out/back. Catering to Saudi Arabia, overthrowing Mossadegh- it's a long sad list of Western imperialism.
But- and here comes the part which may anger many of you- the false equivalency between Xian extremism and Radical Islam, is wrong headed. I understand the impulse to protect the majority of Muslims who are in no way culpable, but it just doesn't logically work. Of course there are Christians who are hateful and violent, but the scale is quite different, and it's not just quantitative.
Every ISIS atrocity I hear of (and I'm not saying Orlando was such an incident), I can't help but think of the Kuwait baby incubator propaganda story, but times are different in this era of social media and we know many of the atrocities we hear about are fact, not propaganda.
Radical Islam is well established within several societies and protected by powerful leaders in several countries. Western actions to reduce it have backfired time after time, actually increasing it.
Pretending that Radical Islamic terrorism isn't any greater a threat than other forms of terrorism currently extant, makes it difficult to discuss it.
Obviously, those primarily to blame are the people actually carrying out horrific attacks, but for decade upon decade, Western Powers and particularly the U.S. have been responsible for creating conditions that foster the twisted philosophy of Radical violent Islamic groups.
I feel a bit guilty just writing this. Hell, if I were Muslim I'm sure I'd feel defensive as hell, and I want to reiterate that I know that it's only a tiny minority of Muslims who are actively involved or associated with groups like ISIS.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
roamer65
(36,745 posts)The problem gets whitewashed because of the all the oil money involved.
Remember Bu$h kissing the Saudi King and that showed the problem in just one picture.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)There's no need to extrapolate Islam seeing other religions have no clean hands on the issue in the US and world wide
cali
(114,904 posts)You say you disagree factually but don't elaborate. And I'm not sure you meant to use the word extrapolate. If you disagree, fine, but at least present some of the facts that you purport to value so highly.
And I clearly did not say that any religion or country had clean hands.
Let me pose a question or two: Can you think of a group, within another religion, that is as powerful, organized and proficient at creating murderous havoc and terror as ISIS?
Can you think of any religiously based nation that is not Islamic that oppresses, based on religion, as harshly as Saudi Arabia or supports terrorism in such a blatant way?
I've made it clear that I think the western powers, particularly the U.S. have a huge amount of responsibility in creating fertile ground for Radical Islam. That's hardly saying we have clean hands. And of course there are Christian terrorists and Buddhist terrorists and Hindu terrorists, but in organization and terrorist acts committed, it's just not on the same level.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... come on, that was a 2 minute look up.
When I say extrapolate it means to pic out exclusively Islam from the rest of the religions with sects that act like oppressive forces on a society.
ALL of them have sects (small offshoots) that do such and that doesn't make the whole so there's no need to specifically point out Islam
cali
(114,904 posts)And nothing the KKK has done in the past few decades can possibly be compared to Paris, Orlando, London, Spain, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, etc. All massive casualty events brought about by radical Islamic extremists.
That's still a poorly chosen word for what you intended to say which is that I'm singling out Islam. Not really what I'm doing. I'm singling out Radical Islamic terrorism. And sorry, but factually it is quantitatively different.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)see, I said in my response that you'll further qualify and narrow (in this case time) the scope to fit the meme
And the KKK and its mindset has set upon my community much more oppression than I've ever experienced from ISIS as of this second.
I do think you're singling out Islam seeing ALL of the religions have sects of stupid that HAVE and has done the stupid.
Question: At what time would you like to start to quantify the atrocities from these sects of stupid so that the sects of Islam can deemed a particular actor?
tia
cali
(114,904 posts)Yes, Islam has a greater problem with radical religious terrorism than the other major religions. Today. And I've made it abundantly clear to you, repeatedly, that I consider western imperialism and U.S. interventions particularly, responsible for creating the conditions from which much of this violence is coming.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... the statement so we can at least be on the same temporal page.... cause I got examples of the other sects of stupid being a particular actor also seeing there's billions of people on Earth.
The stupid doesn't belong in any particular matter to Islam IN ANY WAY
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
There are plenty of those
cali
(114,904 posts)It's not about stupid. It's a complex stew of things that make radical Islamic terrorism, the most prolific and holding the most control over the most lives. As I said, I personally go back to Mossadegh as the first and perhaps most significant western interference in creating fertile ground for the expansion of terrorism under the banner of Islam.
It's not, as I've said, that other religions don't have terrorist sects, but they simply don't have equally destructive, cultural or political power. They haven't committed anything close to the number of atrocities. As someone in this threat quite correctly pointed out, most Muslim terrorism is Muslim against Muslim.
Your wiki link is awfully weak in sustaining your argument.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... politically world wide seeing there are TONS of ways to destroy other than blowing shit up or killing people with a gun.
Religious oppression doesn't start and end at the tip of a rifle, it has a myriad of ways to negatively affect peoples lives.
Islam is not the most prolific especially here in the US in the last 20 years - http://www.salon.com/2013/08/03/the_10_worst_examples_of_christian_or_far_right_terrorism_partner/
The wiki link was a start since you're just now narrowing the time to the last 20 years.
cali
(114,904 posts)
thucythucy
(8,047 posts)and were, at least in part, motivated by historic religious differences. As is the case with the Middle East today, the conflict was also mired in social, economic, and political issues, the basic one being the long history of English oppression of the Irish.
The intense religious conflicts in India see Moslems as often the victims of horrific acts of violence and mass terrorism by Hindus as the other way around. The Serb massacres of Moslem men and boys (and the mass rape of Moslem women and girls) are also within living memory. The religious conflicts in Sri Lanka have nothing to do with Islam at all, but also generated terrorism and atrocities. In central and southern Africa there is horrible violence against LGBT people, much of it motivated by fundamentalist Christianity (and much of THAT originating in the US).
What is different is that these conflicts and instances of oppression were/are by and large localized, because the political context was localized. Whereas American and western disruption of the Middle East draws in a vast geography, and generates a vast resentment, of our support for oppressive regimes and elites, not to mention a long history of military and political intervention, from Lebanon and Iran in the 1950s all the way to Iraq in 2003. Then too, American support for Israel is another factor added into the mix.
It's difficult to talk about the complexities without being accused of being apologists for the terrorists. Add into the mix the vast numbers of people in our various societies who feel displaced, alienated, and may have genuine mental health issues, and things get even more complicated.
None of this matters much to the victims and their families. Whatever the causes or motivations, nothing justifies such barbarism, ever. How to heal the victims and their loved ones to the extent possible, and how to prevent the next atrocity, must be the over riding concerns, at least at this point in time.
Best wishes.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)Maybe the Serbian government under Milosovic - I guess things depend on where you draw the religious/nationalistic line. Go back a few more years and you can add terrible things like the Phalange or Babbar Khalsa. There's a lot to go around.
Akicita
(1,196 posts)Pardon me while I go stick my head back in the sand.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)"extend the application of (a method or conclusion, especially one based on statistics) to an unknown situation by assuming that existing trends will continue or similar methods will be applicable."
I'm unsure what word you are seeking, but it isn't "extrapolate".
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)
frazzled
(18,402 posts)we talk about extremism in other religions quite frequently and with no guilt: the Christian far right, ultra-Orthodox Jewish sects, even some Hindu movements in India. We should be able to discuss extremism within the Muslim religion as freely. After all, we recognize that the vast majority of Christians, Jews, and l Hindus do not promote extreme and/or fundamentalist ideas, and certainly not all are violent. The same holds for Muslims. I, personally, scorn extremism in any of its forms, whether religious, political, or philosophical.
It seems to me so sad--tragic, I should say--that this awful event came the very day after we were so uplifted to see the love and peace that emerged at the Muhammad Ali funeral, with Baptist ministers, Muslim imams, Jewish rabbis, and Native American spiritualists all speaking together with one respectful, peaceful, and hopeful tongue.
still_one
(92,160 posts)religion was a factor. Operation Resucue encourages it
paleotn
(17,911 posts)Much of the anti-choice movement are terrorist organizations by any definition.
still_one
(92,160 posts)
snot
(10,520 posts)the number of killings in the name of Christianity.
I'd also like to wait to hear more about the way Orlando police responded to the crisis. It's possible their actions contributed to the number of deaths.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Serious question.
BumRushDaShow
(128,882 posts)snot
(10,520 posts)
romanic
(2,841 posts)At least you're saying this out in the open. 
snot
(10,520 posts)I'm fine with that, thanks.
cali
(114,904 posts)at least not in the way you're using it. This is now. 2016. And the problem of Radical Islamic terrorism isn't some right wing fantasy.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... amounts of people were killed by Christians on an industrial scale
Miles Archer
(18,837 posts)...your narrow-minded bigotry lives up to your screen name. Congratulations.
Quackers
(2,256 posts)
humbled_opinion
(4,423 posts)but your attempt at minimalizing the current day atrocities committed by radical Islamic fanatics by comparing them to Christian atrocities committed nearly a thousand years ago is twisted.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)WWII Wehrmacht belt buckle, if you don't know what the German words mean they are easy to Google.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Right now, today, radical Islam is a serious problem. Not the Holy Land in the 12th Century. Not 16th Century Spain.
Here. Now.
840high
(17,196 posts)snot
(10,520 posts)For this I get called bigot???
On top of that, yes, most mass killings in the US still have nothing to do with Islam; and even if you pretended that they did, you've still got more risk of being struck by lightening than be being hurt by a terrorist.
So yeah, radical Islam is pretty low on my list of fears.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Did it in the name of ISIS- radical Islam.
snot
(10,520 posts)I'm not saying they did, or that the police did anything wrong.
But I'd like to know more before jumping to conclusions about the best ways to respond to this event.
cigsandcoffee
(2,300 posts)Knee jerking against sensible gun regulations is damaging to the country.
So is pretending that exremist Islamic ideology isn't a real and growing problem, and not at all comparable to problems in any other faith.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)romanic
(2,841 posts)Islamic views. Jfc
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)romanic
(2,841 posts)twisted islamic views.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... the OP response wrote
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)That's a pretty good clue, in my opinion. I think all intentional behaviour has one or more motivations, and some Muslim killers are naming their faith as a motivation.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)to do with the question I answered. Is there a contest I'm unaware of? 
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)When people site religion as a motivation for socially acceptable behavior, few question their stated motivation, but when people site religion for socially unacceptable behavior, their stated motivation is questioned. I don't understand this inconsistency. Seems like a bias to me.
pediatricmedic
(397 posts)Twice as many right wing attacks but with half the number of dead.
elljay
(1,178 posts)They are very different in structure. Christianity is a faith- based religion that does not have laws as a part of its religious doctrine. While it is a supremacist religion like Islam, it is easy to change Christian religious practices precisely because they are not formally a part of the religion's requirements. Islam, by contrast, is a legal and faith-based religion. The Koran is a manual of laws that must be followed. It is not possible to make these laws go away or to ignore them because they are a part of the religious doctrine, the inerrant word of God/Allah. While most Muslims do not support terrorism, many, probably the majority, believe that the Koran is without error and that it should be followed. This includes supremacist laws that codify discrimination against Jews and Christions, that mandate forced conversion of death for Hindis, and that make women second class citizens. This is why the two faiths are not comparable, and I say this as a Jew whose people have suffered mightily at the hands of Christianity, slightly less so at the hands of Muslims. You cannot compare a Christian extremist who commits violent acts that are not taught by the religion with a Muslim extremist who is following precisely what the religion commands. The West certainly stirred the pot but we didn't make the stew.
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)Sincere question.
Because most of the fundamentalist Christians seem to think The Word IS The Law -- moral law which supersedes secular law. Even the more moderate or progressive followers of any religion seem to interpret their religion as a guiding law but don't necessarily follow it to the letter. Kind of like jaywalking; it's against the law but people know it's not horrible and do it all the time. People do the same with their differences regarding their faith's teachings all the time.
Thanks.
elljay
(1,178 posts)but I doubt they really grasp the structural differences among the Abrahamic religions. It is like having a law on the books that makes jaywalking illegal. We may ignore it, but it is still there, ready to be enforced at any time and we teach our children that they should follow the law. A moral law can change, since it is not written in stone, which is why most Christians have stopped forcibly converting non-Christians and slaughtering those who refused. BTW, that IS a law still on the books in Islam, still followed by ISIL and still believed to be a law of God by millions of Muslims who don't do it themselves. When you take the bad laws off the books and tell people that they are not god's will, you allow fundamentalists to take a less violent stance without violating their religion and you don't raise a new generation with toxic beliefs.
braddy
(3,585 posts)Mohammed went from being a peaceful rich merchant to becoming the first Muslim, what was his example?
lancer78
(1,495 posts)if we hadn't invaded Iraq. Those 50 people died because Saadam once tried to kill the man-child's daddy.
JI7
(89,247 posts)he was bigoted against gays . I don't see how you can blame what he did on Bush going into iraq.
Miles Archer
(18,837 posts)That's my take, anyway. Whatever disconnects this guy had, fancying himself as an ISIS member was a part of it.
JI7
(89,247 posts)His religion have him justification to do what he did and see others as the problem.
cali
(114,904 posts)creating fertile ground for blowback in the OP. But those 50 people didn't die just because of the Iraq War. It's so much more complicated than that.
I always wonder how different things would be in the Mideast had we not overthrown Mossadegh.
and, frankly, I think the answer to your question is that if we didn't overthrow Mossadegh, the Middle East might not have exploded at this time or as extensively, but it still would have happened. The Sunni-Shia schism occurred in the 600s, and they have been at odds ever since. Ibn al Wahhab, the founder of the Wahhabi sect that the Saudis follow, lived in the 18th century. For decades the Saudis have been spending millions to spread Wahhabi extremism throughout the world. The Koran's laws discriminate against non-Muslims and require violent responses to blasphemy yet moderate Muslims did not develop sects that rejected those practices. The dictatorships of the ME used Islam to maintain power- the reason their nations failed was because the enemies of Islam (Israel, Jews, Christians etc.) were undermining it. Religions that were persecuted by Islam, such as Hindus and Sikhs in India and Buddhists in Myanmar, started pushing back. We created the opening for ISIS with our horrible ME policies, but the conditions were already there and festering.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)It seems likely that ISIS wouldn't be anywhere near as *powerful* if it hadn't been for the US invasion of Iraq, but equally Al Qaeda, the Taliban, etc would be much more powerful if it weren't for US military action. So choose your crazies.
Imajika
(4,072 posts)The war on terror is, in reality, Muslim versus Muslim. Far more Islamists kill other Muslims than they do any Westerner.
All it takes is around 5% of any population that is fanatical enough to keep the rest frightened and cowed. Especially when that majority have no strong leadership. There just aren't that many militant moderates. Once upon a time in the Muslim world that existed in the form of Pan Arabism, but now that movement has been dramatically weakened (partially thanks to US intervention).
That said, we can not overlook the fact that not all terrorists are Muslim, but a disproportionately large majority are. Islam is a very social and political religion, and many of the most radical interpretations do exist in their texts. Almost any current interpretation of Sharia law simply can not coexist with Western liberal democracy.
The reality is the radicals are losing. And they know it, despite the brave face they put on and slick (violent) videos they put out. Every new satellite dish in the Muslim world is a loss for them, every new Western fashion or song that becomes popular in Islamic lands is a loss for them. So many people here in the US have the mistaken idea that somehow ISIS is this powerhouse that is growing more and more powerful. This is incorrect. Sure, they may have some short term victories, but in the end globalization, the information age, the spread of modern ideas, none of this can be stopped - and all of it is deadly to the radical interpretation of Islam.
It will take time, but radical Islam will fade - just like radical versions of other faiths have mostly done so. It is important to understand that these attacks, wicked and awful as they are, are mostly the last gasps of a dying interpretation of one of the worlds largest religions.
cali
(114,904 posts)romanic
(2,841 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)
TheFrenchRazor
(2,116 posts)Prism
(5,815 posts)Everyone should read this
Arazi
(6,829 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)Americans in WWII, we can discuss many things. Assuming some kind of collective guilt for all Muslim-Americans is not better than assuming collective guilt for all Japanese-Americans 75 years ago.
cali
(114,904 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)There are people who want to take out their personal sense of whatever on the world. Giving them a "cause" makes them feel big about it. This one is big and bad and violent and scary enough to make small minds feel like big "martyrs".l
Rex
(65,616 posts)that seem to be okay with broiling people alive or carving their flesh from a victim's body then throwing them off a 10 story building. I have no problems talking about the violent fanatics that pervert religions into death cults.
What is hard to talk about is the Culture of Death guns bring to the table. It makes gun lovers nervous as if they are all being blamed for it and in fact it is like you said it is small groups of like minded people.
how many gunz were needed to broil a person, skin a person, behead a person, throw a person off a roof, half bury and split skulls with rocks ?
It's not the tool used to kill, it's the mindset behind the killer.
Rex
(65,616 posts)of a gun. Like I said it is small groups of like minded people, so thanks for agreeing with me.
chknltl
(10,558 posts).....for these nuts to obtain this kind of easy killing means.
rah rah islam
boo hiss christians
how about, screw the religions
Think about the senseless loss of life at the hands of some hater
cali
(114,904 posts)and I've written about the horrible loss of life and spent the morning in tears- a rarity for me.
thanks for your contribution to the discussion.
DustyJoe
(849 posts)I hit reply in the wrong area cali
I was intending to respond to the statement above
the number of killings in the name of Christianity.
there was nothing in your op eschewing either religion as I was responding to.
Sorry
cali
(114,904 posts)
Response to DustyJoe (Reply #30)
Rex This message was self-deleted by its author.
kcjohn1
(751 posts)Unfortunately there is no way of stopping wackos and crazies. These lone wolfes are always going to be with us. As callus as this sounds, this issue is not a pressing issue. People dying from terrorism in USA is very low and your odds of being victim of it is nearly negligible. What we should be doing is trying to limit guns and dangerous weapons to people who shouldn't be accessing it. By doing this you limit events like this, and at same time gun violence which is a real issue.
Islamic extremism is actually major issue in certain Islamic countries (Middle East/Parts of Africa/Asia). Unfortunately US has only contributed to this problem, and the best avenue is to stay as far away from these countries, and let them deal with it. The good news is these extremists are in the minority, and will eventually be clamped out by the locals.
cali
(114,904 posts)read the op.
Rex
(65,616 posts)How curious.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Then if someone does, people on the same side will usually end up questioning whether or not you've turned on your own side. Then new lines get drawn.
We're a tribal species. It's part of who we are. Especially in the abstract world that we live in. We always have to qualify everything in the "but it doesn't represent the whole of that group" thing. Which, as you say, ends up making discussion difficult, because you can't accuse anyone of this or that, as that isn't fair to anyone.
If you feel guilty just writing or thinking something, how can anyone talk about it? Whatever someone agrees with makes it difficult to justify or rationalize criticizing it. If you disagree with something, it's very easy to talk about how bad it is, or how something needs to be done, etc. There's no guilt involved at all. The white patriarchy, very easy for people on the left side of the spectrum to talk about. Anything that isn't that, much more difficult. Now you're going after what is traditionally the minority, which the left side is usually fighting for. With radical Islamic terrorism, you're talking about a minority of a minority, at least in the US, which makes it that much more complicated.
Then people always have to add in Western imperialism. You can't get away from it, because it's right there. On the other hand, radical Islamic terrorism is right there too. Who threw the first punch? How far back does that game go?
We're prisoners of history, and slaves to the future. We're all stuck with the reality that past actions created, and can't go back to re-do anything. Human consciousness and what we call history is a tough nut to crack.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)And it's not just radical Islam that is terrible, it's just the one most likely to act. Islam overall is an incredibly bigoted and hateful belief system, right in its texts, as are all the Abrahamic faiths, and it's no surprise at all that the hate and bigotry of these religions lead to all sorts of negative outcomes for society, with the most extreme negative outcomes being the violence we see.
Saying "radical Islam" is the problem is ignoring the roots of the problem, a hateful and bigoted belief system. Pew polling has shown how most Muslims around the world feel on a lot of issues, and hate and bigotry is prevalent, and in line with their own religious texts.
The power and privilege of religion means that people pretend "mainstream" religions can NEVER be a problem, because they are ONLY good, even our own Democratic leaders defend religious privilege all the time.
But when you have holy texts condemning homosexuals, EVERYONE who identifies with said belief system is indirectly responsible for everything from homophobic remarks to homophobic laws to mass murders that are carried out based on said holy texts.
Those who ignore their own texts or "interpret" it away are NOT helping, they are only trying to maintain their own identity with a bigoted belief system. They are excusing the problem to preserve their own power and privilege.
AntiBank
(1,339 posts)Saying "radical Islam" is the problem is ignoring the roots of the problem, a hateful and bigoted belief system. Pew polling has shown how most Muslims around the world feel on a lot of issues, and hate and bigotry is prevalent, and in line with their own religious texts.
This is what drives me INSANE about so many in the West. They see "good Muslims" (ie people of Islamic faith who are similar in social beliefs or modes of behaviour to themselves) and they project out from that 2 huge mistakes:
1 They have no clue that these "good Muslims" are literally, if they are as tolerant as the average person on this board, so so so far into apostasy as specifically stated by the Q'uran. The Q'uran is NOT open for personal "pick and choose" application. It Is considered the EXACT and UNERRING word of God (Allah) by the vast majority of Muslims in the world, especially those in Islamic dominated countries. Sectarian intra Islamic wars are fought to large degree over different translations and versions of the Q'uran.
2 The number of people, the percentage, in Muslim-dominated countries (where the VAST majority of Muslims globally live) who partially or fully approve of Jihadic, asymmetrical military/socio-economic/cultural struggle against the unbelievers (up to and including ISIS style jihad) is staggeringly higher than we care to admit. Just because they are not on the front lines, these people help the cause by either material support, group collective maintenance of horrific social bigotries and suppression of human rights wherever they live, or by simply doing NOTHING to condemn and hinder the jihad. Sort of like we say in the West, "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem."
alarimer
(16,245 posts)The bigotry against homosexuals is certainly not restricted to Islam.
The problem is here we have a toxic stew of one person who believed awful things, who was somehow enraged by the thought of men kissing, and who was stalker and menace to his coworkers, who abused his wife and yet, somehow, legally managed to get his hands on enough weapons to shoot up a nightclub like some Scarface-wannabe.
Yes, we do have to have the discussion about radical Islam and terrorism, but I think this case had less to do with that and more to do with our poisonous American attitudes towards guns and tolerance of violence as a problem-solving method.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)Nail on the head.
rug
(82,333 posts)The caps were scarcely necessary.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)that has founding texts laying out hatred of gay people so explicitly (and other bigotry), where people would not only feel comfortable identifying with said belief system, but would somehow feel entitled to call "bigotry" when someone else pointed it out. But religious privilege seems to know no bounds, and you positively drip with it.
rug
(82,333 posts)What you have done is move from a sophomoric critique of scriptures, from belief systems from around the world, to a flat out condemnation of literally billions of human beings.
There's a word for that. And you positively drip with it.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)Did others defend fascism because so many people liked it? Did they get angry when others "condemned" fascists by linking their belief systems to hateful fascist texts? Did they invent terms like fascismophobia to call out anyone who was critical of it?
What you've done is try to shift the responsibility of identifying with hateful belief systems because "billions" of people do. So what? That's the whole problem! It's completely normal to identify with hateful texts and not have to answer for it, ONLY as long as you're part of a mainstream religion.
Pointing this out isn't much of a "condemnation". It's a critique, and the only thing I think people should do is be honest about the connection that is there and reevaluate how they identify. Lots of people are starting to do this in the US, identifying as "spiritual" rather than identifying with belief systems with very checkered beliefs and texts. They are no longer normalizing hate, which is HUGE.
The problem with so many "moderates" that continue to identify with their belief systems that are hateful and bigoted at their core is that genuinely nice, good people are giving credibility to a belief system that is fundamentally bigoted and hateful, and shifting blame from the source to "extremists", so a real issue isn't being addressed.
rug
(82,333 posts)In this case, you're accusing virtually every member of a religion of encouraging mass murder.
That is, as you say, " fundamentally bigoted and hateful".
Not to mention stupid.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)it's just true. If you identify with a hateful belief system, you ARE indirectly responsible for the hateful actions it inspires.
Quackers
(2,256 posts)I'm surprised I'm only the second one.
cali
(114,904 posts)And I get it. I understand why. This is painful stuff.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)Terrorists and terror groups may be members of religions, but their actions should not to be twisted into condemnations of religions.
Crazy people do crazy shit. That does not make all people crazy.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)Said exactly no one on DU, almost exactly a year ago today.
And that is precisely the problem, as I see it. People are so cowardly about being intellectually honest that they have to be politically correct even when anonymous on the internet.
YvonneCa
(10,117 posts)...of the terrorists. It is what they want..a conflict between religions. IMO, that is the reason for not labeling it Islamic.
It is also not a conflict between civilizations. It is a conflict between being civilization and barbarism...an important distinction. The terrorists are against modernity. They want to take civilization back to the Dark Ages.
Jimmy Carter wrote a book about how he views the problem as fundamentalism, whether in Islam, Christianity or any other religion. I think he is on to something... 😉
TheFrenchRazor
(2,116 posts)in the real world.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
JCMach1
(27,556 posts)They were also integral in the rise of ISIL.
Unfortunately, they have also used their influence to influence even our perfectly fine Muslim friends and neighbors. KSA trained imams and KSA funded mosques and Islamic centers are the norm, not the exception across North America.
I will just give you one example of how this has worked in Kenya. Muslims have always been a significant minority there. Over the last 20-30 years you could actually visually see the colorful traditional Muslim cover get replaced by the black of the religious fundamentalists. Now, the majority of women wear (or are forced to wear) black and total cover in the African Heat and humidity of coastal Kenya. Since then, tribal conflicts on the coast have become more and more tinged with religious ideology. Consequently, the death toll has spiked in every conflict. In fact, it makes Orlando look like a small affair.
Glorfindel
(9,726 posts)It SHOULD NOT be hard to talk about radical Islamic terrorism, but, alas, it is. You're absolutely right. One can only hope the radical Islamic terrorists go the way of the IRA, terrorists on a much smaller scale but who did much harm nonetheless.
get the red out
(13,462 posts)I agree, but I could have never put it as well as you did, great post.
still_one
(92,160 posts)the killings at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado and other places, along with the killing of Doctors that perform abortions or bombings, are also centered in a religious basis
drmeow
(5,017 posts)One of the most terrifying experiences I remember from my childhood (more terrifying than the bomb going off across the street from my apartment building at the start of the civil war and more terrifying than hearing the gun and mortar fire during the civil war) occurred when I was on a picnic with my family. Suddenly, seemingly out of nowhere, two fighter jets screamed overhead, dropped some bombs on the hillside in the distance, and screamed back the way they came. It scared the f**king shit out of me. Who it was, where they came from, and what they bombed is irrelevant to the story. What is relevant is that it terrorized me.
The level of terror inflicted by ISIS and the level of threat represented by ISIS is MINUSCULE compared to the level of terror we have inflicted for decades in the Muslim world. From the perspective of Pakistani's, Afghani's, and Iraqi's in particular, radical western capitalism is well established and protected by powerful leaders in several countries who have fighter jets and nuclear weapons and who have been committing terrorist attacks on them for decades. The actions of our military are terrifying to the innocent people who witness them and devastating to the civilians whose families are killed and whose homes are destroyed.
Admittedly, it is a tiny minority of Americans who are actually members of the armed forces and the CIA and are actually directly associated with various acts of violence against the Muslim world starting with (just to pick a moment in time) the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran orchestrated by the UK and US in 1953 and continuing through multiple wars of aggression and random drone strikes. As an American, I feel defensive as hell.
Something needs to be done about the twisted imperialistic philosophy of the American government and corporate power structure combined with the rabid anti-socialist agenda that leads them to wage wars, depose leaders, prop up dictators, violate non-Western country's sovereignty, and generally act like terrorist bullies. But, when those acts of terror are perpetrated by a powerful country's military - no one wants to call it terrorism.
No, we don't have to and should not talk about radical Islamic terrorism - we have to talk about general incitement to violence in any sector and easy access to guns.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)the labor and humanity from human beings we termed slaves.
Tough to get self-righteous enough to blame someone else for emulating what we are so proud of, without a whole lot of whitewash.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)years prior to the Euro/American trade and it continued long after the Atlantic slave trade ceased. So the two cultures don't have much standing to claim the other is the slaver culture. Both were. Theirs first and significantly longer in duration.
cali
(114,904 posts)
Stonepounder
(4,033 posts)Currently? Can't think of any currently. However, I can think of many in my lifetime.
The IRA vs the British. The Orange vs The Green (Protestants vs Catholics). Hell, what I believe came very close to the Second Civil War over Civil Rights when the Guard was Federalized to force a State Governor to obey the dictates of SCOTUS. Even today we have so-called Christians calling for the murder of doctors who perform abortions, or calling for the death of LGBT individuals.
What we are seeing today with Islam is the same thing we are seeing on a much smaller scale in the US. The old order is losing its grip. Here in the US it is the aging white population what sees their position of privilege fading. In the middle East it is the imans seeing their power fading, coupled with the outside forces trying to impose their will on the population.
Yes, the big bogyman is Radical Islam, but that's today. Who knows what it will be tomorrow.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Many Muslims feel like outcasts in the world mostly dominated by modern/Christian culture and norms. Things we take for granted as normal rights can be huge issues for Muslims. Most deal it but many feel angry and resentful and it can build into rage and finally at some point something triggers them into contemplating violence. I have no idea how to deal with this issue but I suspect this is simply going to get worse before it gets better... especially with wackos like Trump making crazy comments inciting further anger.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)desires of those who are angry that LGBT people exist.
I wonder if you would type 'Things we take for granted as normal rights can be huge issues for White Nationalists' as if that was a righteous excuse?
My rights are in fact granted by the creator and enumerated in the Constitution. There is no right to have 'issues' with other people's rights and equality.
Gore1FL
(21,128 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)You may be completely Americacentric, but I am not. Try reading for comprehension. It's clear you did not.
mountain grammy
(26,619 posts)Because that would be pretending to ignore radical Islam. Those guys are seriously scary. Remember Tim McVeigh?
Gore1FL
(21,128 posts)Right wing christian terrorists are much worse in the U.S.
kacekwl
(7,016 posts)these groups are growing , somewhere , someone is funding , supplying these terrorists . I'm SURE our government and other governments know who . The question is why so little is done about it. I'm sure $$$$$$$$ has something to do with it. There are many EVIL fucks out there besides ISIS.
plimsoll
(1,668 posts)Unlike many posts, I actually found this one offensive.
First off, there is merit to the basic premise that Islamic extremists in the US have had more successful mass killings in the US than Christians in the US. That said your argument is so narrowly scoped as to be the equivalent of asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
I have 2 basic objections.
The first is that Christians have been remarkably successful in excluding attacks by Christians by arguing “they aren’t really Christians.” If you doubt this, you’re not looking at the Breivik killings. And Christians ran fast and hard from that.
The second is why would they bother in this country? They can use the laws.
We shouldn’t say they are the same, but we can’t ignore the notion that both religions contain elements that are dancing with glee over this.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)poorly of both faiths do not see the bigotry in one as mitigation of bigotry in the other. When there are 50 dead, 'Johnny did it too' is a creepy excuse to offer.
ProfessorGAC
(65,000 posts)Well said.
plimsoll
(1,668 posts)The original post is an argument that Islam is worse than Christianity. I’m not making a both sides do it argument. I’m objecting to the eagerness to ignore the flaws on ones own side while focusing on the flaws of those you have issue with.
We make jokes about this behavior when Republicans do it.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)That's what's called "stacking the deck." It's also silly to conflate multiple separate conflicts and actions under a single umbrella. That's the kind of thinking that leads to right-wing claims like "Communism has killed more people than anything else."
Hey, maybe they're right. We need to admit that the Left has a serious problem, that it's more violent than other political views. We need to confront the issue of Leftist violence and not pretend that right-wing violence is comparable.
Oh wait, that's not how it works? Do tell...
TheFrenchRazor
(2,116 posts)(worldwide) has a higher proportion of violent extremists than most other religions; IMO the root of the problem is really cultural rather than religious, but the two are so intertwined, it's hard to separate them.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)When the USA invaded Iraq with shock and awe, didn't everyone in the USA become a violent extremist and terrorist?
There is no distinction between religion and other belief systems, in the sense that an ideology one believes in leads to actions one takes. To distinguish religion as the problem instead of ideology is a matter of parsing terminology.
If the truth should be spoken here as you say, the USA and their religion of imposing democracy on oil rich countries is the worst case of violent ideology in the world today, killing the most people and causing the most mayhem and terrorizing the most people, from Vietnam to Afghanistan, to Iraq, to Libya, to Syria, .... with millions of victims.
Do the body count. Religious faiths don't have military bases spread across the globe. Let's get real and speak truth.
enid602
(8,615 posts)Ironically, I feel that the latest spate of ISIS-inspired terrorism is due to the SUCCESS of Obama's strategy with regard to ISIS. In addition to the recent successes of the Iraqi Army and significant loss of ISIS-controlled territory, the Iraqi Army recently reported that Iraqis they had liberated after overtaking parts of Fallujah were literally STARVING. Remember, the caliphate was intended to replace governments across the Levant. They can't even FEED their people.
Unfortunately, I think ISIS will continue to tap into whatever network of cells they have abroad and have them commit increasingly more egregious acts of terrorism, until their network has been exhausted. Hopefully, a final Iraqi victory in Mosul will dishearten whatever assets they have left abroad.
BootinUp
(47,141 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)it qualifies as word salad.
Simply labeling it word salad without specifying why you think that, and being able to point out the sentences that make no sense, is nothing but silly and petty.
And frankly, I find your "lol", disturbing.
Your post appears to be nothing but petty malice.
BootinUp
(47,141 posts)but it does no such thing. You just use it as a vehicle to attack things in the past. I wasted time reading it.
cali
(114,904 posts)Attack what in the past? You are the one posting nonsensical crap. I'm wasting time responding to your petty malice.
You are attacking me personally because you don't like me. And you have neither the guts to admit it, or anything thoughtful to say.
Whatever. I'm done with bothering with responding to your meaningless posts.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)1) Liberals/progressives historically have issues with fundamentalist Christians (FC's), and the way FC's try to force their beliefs on everyone else (anti-abortion efforts, Ten Commandments monuments, school prayer, etc.). Shifting to a focus on radical Islam is not easy, and frankly I think some liberals/progressives would rather focus on the "easy" issues with Christians like Ten Commandment monuments and school prayer, than on the more difficult issue of mass killings due to radical Islam.
2) Liberals/progressives have spent so much of the last 15 years focused on defending Arabs from racism, that they've lost the ability to (appropriately) condemn radical Islam, regardless of the race of the perpetrator. It's almost like we've forgot that Islam does not equal Arab. It IS possible to condemn all Islamic extremism without condemning all Arabs, people.
3) Liberals/progressives always consider historical context, sometimes to a fault. It's amazing how many people want to defend today's Islamic extremism by saying Christians did the same thing during the Crusades a thousand years ago.
Such thinking assumes Muslims are similarly as uneducated and unenlightened as the Christians were during the Crusades, and thus they should be "excused" when they commit violent behavior. And if you think Muslims are uneducated or unenlightened, then you really ARE a bigot.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)Or Nelson Mandela?
Both lived in countries that were negatively impacted by colonialism and/or imperialism. Why didn't those men turn to terrorism?
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)
ck4829
(35,067 posts)There is a such thing as "Islamic terrorism", but I, for one, really don't want to be picking up and using the bullet points and adopting the discourse of people who suggest mass bans, laws about surveillance and granting prosecution new powers getting just a little bit too close to totalitarianism, more war on the table (especially because that's gone so well so far), bombing cities just so they can "put the fear of God in them", dismissing all Muslims from government service, ethnic cleansing, and I think it should stop right there.
This potential is there, and you see it, "I fear the demonization of Muslims that could lead to horrific attacks on innocent people." Efrain Rios Montt, the genocidal Guatemalan dictator, had a regime that equated Mayans who needed to controlled, communists that needed to be killed, and demons who needed to be exorcised as one collective entity. I got the "dismissing all Muslims from government service" from Concerned Women for America and the foundation is there to simply switch Mayan to Muslim, keep the demon, and switch communist to terrorist.
ck4829
(35,067 posts)I'm not giving these people anything, not one iota. Agreeing with these people, appeasing them, anything but opposition to them is sheer lunacy.
