Cartoons in Europe anger Muslims

Discuss events that have an impact on you and the world today. A home for honest, serious, and open discussion.

Re: Cartoons in Europe anger Muslims

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:08 pm

Dong Zhou wrote:
(as I hope the Anders Breivik case has effectively demonstrated)


Could you explain that line a bit more?


Crazedmongoose wrote:Petulant as it might be WWD, wouldn't you agree they're still morally less in the wrong or excuses the responding acts of violence and intimidation by the religious extremists?

Like that guy who burnt the Koran to make a point. Dude's a grossly irresponsible, discriminatory idiot, but he's still not a murderer, and the same thing can't be said about the men who in response to that killed a bunch of people.


Crazedmongoose: no, they're not. Both the xenophobic secular hard right and the Islamists have murdered people in response to each other. And Breivik is far from a lone wolf - these far-right groups have undertaken deadly campaigns of intimidation against Muslim-heavy populations, particularly in places where public order is still somewhat weak (Russia, for example). And I have little doubt that the football hooligans / the EDL and their ilk would like nothing better than to see Britain turned into the same kind of cesspit of communal violence.

And here's the really ironic bit. The right-wing politicians and commentators whom Breivik quoted at length in his manifesto - Wilders, Phillips, Steyn, Spencer, Gellar, Bawer et al. - all make a tidy living feeding off the resentment of secularists against Muslims by saying that they are 'appeased' by Western legal bodies, by saying that people who try to 'understand' their motivations are wasting their time or, at worst, enabling their crimes. And what did they all do - each and every one of them - when Breivik was apprehended and the truth came out that he wasn't a Muslim terrorist (as each and every one of them assumed on no other ground but bigotry)?

They appeased. They bent over but good.

All of a sudden, it was Breivik's motivations for butchering seventy children that we were being asked to 'understand'. Those who weren't bleating that they weren't to blame for what Breivik did were either dismissing him as a lone madman or claiming him as proof that they were right all along. In my mind, the Islamists who try to make excuses for suicide bombings and the xenophobic secularists who try to make excuses for Breivik are cut from the same cloth, are equally depraved, and deserve each other every bit.
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
WeiWenDi
Hedgehog Emperor
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

Re: Cartoons in Europe anger Muslims

Unread postby Crazedmongoose » Thu Jun 07, 2012 2:04 am

Are Breivik and his ilk even secularists are just islamaphobes? I would consider secularists people like Christopher Hitchens who holds religion and religious influences with disdain universally (and realistically being a secular humanist I'd fall into this camp philosophically, except pragmatically, the humanist part of me especially, realises the good organised religion can do). People like Breivik and Wilders have no problem with religion unless it's Islam.

I mean Breivik even identified a lot with Christian traditions like the Crusades or the Knights Templars. It seems like he is a lot like the European fascists (granted he is one) who are really no Christians at all, but would use Christianity primarily as a weapon to persecute Western conflict against Islam. I don't consider those people secularists.
User avatar
Crazedmongoose
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:10 am
Location: Sydney, Aus

Re: Cartoons in Europe anger Muslims

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:00 pm

Crazedmongoose wrote:Are Breivik and his ilk even secularists are just islamaphobes? People like Breivik and Wilders have no problem with religion unless it's Islam.

I mean Breivik even identified a lot with Christian traditions like the Crusades or the Knights Templars. It seems like he is a lot like the European fascists (granted he is one) who are really no Christians at all, but would use Christianity primarily as a weapon to persecute Western conflict against Islam. I don't consider those people secularists.


Well, Breivik doesn't really seem to be in agreement with himself on that particular point. He describes himself as a 'cultural Christian' and 'not a very religious person', and saw himself as having common ground on the anti-Islamic front with agnostics, atheists and neopagans. His Christianity is pretty much entirely ersatz - he loves only those aspects of Christianity which can be used to justify his hatred of Muslims and of the political left. Witness his contempt for Protestant churches which treat the Palestinian cause as justified, and bile against Pope Benedict XVI for even speaking with Muslims.

But if you look at the underlying arguments which these people - Breivik as well as his primary influences on the anti-Islamic xenophobic hard right - they are entirely secular. They cannot stand the idea that Muslims might have an identity which is not in full conformity with the modern European nation-state, just as their predecessors could not stand the idea that Jews might have such an identity. And if you reach even further back - to Pim Fortuyn, for example, the godfather of the anti-Islamic xenophobic hard right - he was just as much anti-Christian and anti-monarchist as he was anti-Islamic, as many of his speeches make plain. He wanted to keep religion safely out of the public eye so as not to intrude upon his libertine-capitalist social goals - the disastrous legalised drug, prostitution and underage sex policies of the Netherlands chief among them.

Wilders is cut from exactly the same cloth. He opposes all reasonable forms of welfare provision, public ownership or defence of labour rights. He opposes legal immigration not just from predominantly Muslim countries but also from Eastern Europe (because those people tend to be uncomfortably pious in their Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and rightly opposed to the trafficking into and sexual exploitation of their countrywomen in legal brothels). He still personally favours the war in Afghanistan. His real target is not Muslims or even Islam as such, but the Catholic Christian foundations of the Dutch monarchy. (Personally, I think the Queen managed to make the scarf look quite stylish, a far cry from a 'sad exhibition' of any sort.)

Ah well. Leave it to SoSZ's resident crank to attack Geert Wilders from the right. :P

But that's because I'm speaking as a High Tory rather than as one of these damn Whigs playing dress-up as conservatives.
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
WeiWenDi
Hedgehog Emperor
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

Previous

Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved