I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Londoner
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:47 am

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Londoner »

attofishpi wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:30 pm ]The religious ideology driving force i am talking about here is Islam. Semi-trailers\cars\knives\IEDs etc. used by ISLAMISTS.
Come back when you comprehend logic.
You are still being strangely restrictive with that list of weapons.

Is your argument that it is a religious requirement for ISLAMIST terrorists to use 'Semi-trailers\cars\knives\IEDs etc.' as opposed to atomic bombs, napalm, cruise missiles, drones, helicopters etc. If so, I have to tell you, I think that view is mistaken. I think that if they had the same weapons as Christians and atheists they would use them instead.

But don't trouble yourself by trying to work out what you are saying. I think we both know that Mr Logic rarely finds himself at home in this sort of discussion.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by attofishpi »

Londoner wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:40 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:30 pm ]The religious ideology driving force i am talking about here is Islam. Semi-trailers\cars\knives\IEDs etc. used by ISLAMISTS...against CIVILIANS.
Come back when you comprehend logic.
You are still being strangely restrictive with that list of weapons.

Is your argument that it is a religious requirement for ISLAMIST terrorists to use 'Semi-trailers\cars\knives\IEDs etc.' as opposed to atomic bombs, napalm, cruise missiles, drones, helicopters etc. If so, I have to tell you, I think that view is mistaken. I think that if they had the same weapons as Christians and atheists they would use them instead.

But don't trouble yourself by trying to work out what you are saying. I think we both know that Mr Logic rarely finds himself at home in this sort of discussion.
It amazes me that your brain is powerful enough to tap a keyboard, but that is the extent of it. To think you actually want me to list every type of weaponry that could fall into the hands of a Muslim. der.
User avatar
Seleucus
Posts: 662
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:53 am

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Seleucus »

Big week for islamists. Ariana Grande concert blown up, 100 girls killed or maimed, overran a major city, Marawi, in the Philippines, and closer to home, a double bombing. Just reading, fifteen years ago, 70% supported Shariah, today it has risen to 80, minus out the non-Muslim population and nationally it's almost unanimous. The particulars are less supported, less than a quarter overtly want eating during Ramadan banned or five times a day prayer enforced. While not strictly an Islamic state, the national laws come increasingly to resemble Shariah. In educational policy, what's happened is science, history and foreign languages are being cut out or reduced in the curriculum and religious education time slots increased. Survey shows that more than 80% of religion teachers support Shariah, additionally, 20% of total students are educated in madrasahs. One academic mentions and I agree, that since the upper and middle class (about 20% and who are largely non-Muslim) rely on private schools, education, transport and so on, the uneducated and impoverished underclass majority stagnate supported by a corrupt and ineffective government and more more and more religious as they loose hope in the freedom and prosperity the end of colonialism promised but failed to deliver. In research and scholarly literature this has all been predicted from the early 2000s, even '80s. The trajectory is expected to continue. In the best case scenario for the Muslim developing world, dictatorships prevent Islamist from getting power through election and the upper-classes are able to maintain their infrastructure. Worst case, Islamists get power and inaugurate a cyber-mideaval period.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Immanuel Can »

I was speaking from experience...not just the land of my birth, but also lands I have been to recently. I have been some places most people will never go. And I've been to some very privileged places too.
Justintruth
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Justintruth »

.... The southern hemisphere does not have the psychological assets to develop independently and those qualities are not going to emerge on their own.....
What do you think about eliminating the idea of non interference in internal affairs. (Imperialism minus racism and minus nationalism with complete free trade in labor and citizenship and robust funding for education and a strong safety net with a form of multi-culturalism that is deliberately limited so it does not override values and the resulting benefits like promptness, queuing etc?)
Meanwhile, there is no incentive for Western societies to intervene and show leadership or assist in the way that colonialism formerly made it profitable.
What?! No incentive?!

I guess I think we are in the kill zone and have very strong incentives to act now. Human primate behavior - based on its neurology I assume - has strong instincts that will lead to war and in the asymmetric warfare emerging will not allow "us" as conventionally defined to avoid catostrofic conflict unless we can alter the identities to which the human population currently define their being with.

Perhaps you mean market incentives.

Like the environment we just need to make the price reflect all of the actual costs which are staggering.
As I discussed earlier, one hope might be repatriating refugees who have acquired values, habits, and money during their time in the West and on returning home will be able to affect change.
What do you think about globalizing the patria of patriotism. What if we gave international passports to 1% of 18 year olds by lottery, then 2%, then 4% perhaps with a throttlable rate?

I have an unrelated question. Do you think automation is causing those without strong intellectual endowments from presenting their needs and desires as economic demands because the automated economy no longer allows them to exchange labor for cash. In general how do you think the demand for labor as a function of skill matches up with the labor attainable with training. In equilibrium -and given environmental constraints - will there be a surplus of labor that drives the supply/demand equilibrium off optimal as measured by the desire and aspirations of the population.
Justintruth
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Justintruth »

Seleucus wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 5:12 pm Big week for islamists. Ariana Grande concert blown up, 100 girls killed or maimed, overran a major city, Marawi, in the Philippines, and closer to home, a double bombing. Just reading, fifteen years ago, 70% supported Shariah, today it has risen to 80, minus out the non-Muslim population and nationally it's almost unanimous. The particulars are less supported, less than a quarter overtly want eating during Ramadan banned or five times a day prayer enforced. While not strictly an Islamic state, the national laws come increasingly to resemble Shariah. In educational policy, what's happened is science, history and foreign languages are being cut out or reduced in the curriculum and religious education time slots increased. Survey shows that more than 80% of religion teachers support Shariah, additionally, 20% of total students are educated in madrasahs. One academic mentions and I agree, that since the upper and middle class (about 20% and who are largely non-Muslim) rely on private schools, education, transport and so on, the uneducated and impoverished underclass majority stagnate supported by a corrupt and ineffective government and more more and more religious as they loose hope in the freedom and prosperity the end of colonialism promised but failed to deliver. In research and scholarly literature this has all been predicted from the early 2000s, even '80s. The trajectory is expected to continue. In the best case scenario for the Muslim developing world, dictatorships prevent Islamist from getting power through election and the upper-classes are able to maintain their infrastructure. Worst case, Islamists get power and inaugurate a cyber-mideaval period.
What you sow so shall you reap. This is still a tiny fraction of where this is headed. Bush - Trump - Osama the martyr. It's a recipe for catastrophe. The news from the Saudi meeting with trump must be seen within the context of the Saudi support for jihad and their attempt to ride wahabi religious furor to support their autocracy.

Double down and go around a couple of times and we will have the war Osama wanted to start. No one can win such a conflict. The only victory that can be had is in avoiding it.

The best that can be hoped with is a walled - gated - community surrounded by a slum. Is that where we want to go? Isn't that a little....risky?
Justintruth
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Justintruth »

attofishpi wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:46 pm
Londoner wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:40 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:30 pm ]The religious ideology driving force i am talking about here is Islam. Semi-trailers\cars\knives\IEDs etc. used by ISLAMISTS...against CIVILIANS.
Come back when you comprehend logic.
You are still being strangely restrictive with that list of weapons.

Is your argument that it is a religious requirement for ISLAMIST terrorists to use 'Semi-trailers\cars\knives\IEDs etc.' as opposed to atomic bombs, napalm, cruise missiles, drones, helicopters etc. If so, I have to tell you, I think that view is mistaken. I think that if they had the same weapons as Christians and atheists they would use them instead.

But don't trouble yourself by trying to work out what you are saying. I think we both know that Mr Logic rarely finds himself at home in this sort of discussion.
It amazes me that your brain is powerful enough to tap a keyboard, but that is the extent of it. To think you actually want me to list every type of weaponry that could fall into the hands of a Muslim. der.
Why don't you go re-read what he said? Maybe try to understand what you are responding to? Hint: He is not asking you to list weapons.
Justintruth
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Justintruth »

Seleucus wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 1:42 pm
Greta wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 12:48 pm
Seleucus wrote:The great hope of the masses of the developing world was prosperity and freedom. But as the prosperity and freedom that came to the 3rd world was largely brought in my the colonizers, not an indigenous accomplishment, when the developing world was left to fend for itself, there was a total failure. The aspirations of freedom and prosperity gave way to hopelessness and resentment. Radical Islam is then taken as the opposite of the American dream that came to nothing and in the dualistic thinking of simple mind (and more sophisticated too), embrace of Islamism represents the rejection of a failed hope and dream.
That looks like a failure of the colonisers to properly consider succession planning.
I believe it goes to the point of "civilizational trajectory". It is very hard to change a culture. When the Dutch left Indonesia things went on as they always have, when the British left Indian, when the Americans left the Philippines...
Yes but that is because of the communication bandwidth that was present then plus border control and finally racial and national discrimination.

It just might be possible to overcome these forces internationally but we must give nationalism the same stench that racism has. Actually we are still not done with race. Racism, nationalism, religious discrimination have to be countered. No wall. No America first. Something that at least has a chance is needed. Genuine multiculturalism

We are not condemned to repeat history if we understand and correct. As Henry Kissinger once said: "The absence of alternatives clears the head marvelously"
Justintruth
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Justintruth »

Actually your regular attacks on the "left" and the "EU" are an excellent demonstration of how empires fall - internal hatreds even greater than distrust of outsiders. Your hatred for the left and the EU is obvious and visceral. You see them as evil entities that must be dismantled and destroyed
.

That visceral hatred - I dismiss the notion that it is intellectual - cost the top economic tier a lot of money to create. Think tank -> AM radio talk shows -> Fox News. It's one propaganda system. The visceral hatred it creates is aimed squarely at checks on financial power. Discredit government, the law, teachers, science, environmentalism, anything that threatens the money.
Do you not know that there were more human beings killed in the 20th Century than in all previous centuries combined?
Here is the non-propaganda version:

https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace/
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Arising_uk »

attofishpi wrote:Oh ok - could you point out the ones that drive semi-trailers through crowds of innocent people? ..and those that intentionally target children with IEDs?
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politi ... hear-about

You think we whiter than white do you? So what do you call Christians who drop drone missiles upon wedding parties? Who fire depleted uranium rounds in urban areas? Who drop cluster-bombs and cruise missiles in urban areas?

I'm sick to death of hearing our politicians say "How can they do such things?" "Who can understand why they do such things?" And most of all this 'innocent people' guff' as we give two tosses about the thousands of innocent dead children due to our foreign policies and actions.
attofishpi wrote:He wouldn't be a sage to do such a thing, nevertheless, I would tell him to fuck off - just like ive told him and 'God' to do countless times already.
Eh! Then presumably they've done such a thing?
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Arising_uk »

Immanuel Can wrote:...
I don't know how "free" the indigenous people in your area were. Ours warred endlessly on each other, kept slaves, rambled from place to place whenever the local territory was exhausted, had little in learning or technology (not even the wheel), and nothing in medicine, and were basically superstitious animists. Was that "free"? Maybe. But it wasn't "free" to do much.
These'll be those indigenous people who taught your pilgrims how to survive and saved them from starvation would it? Bet they wish they hadn't now.

With respect to the medicine, didn't save them from the typhus, measles, smallpox, et al that the pox ridden Christians brought with them.
Last edited by Arising_uk on Fri May 26, 2017 12:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Greta »

Arising_uk wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 10:46 pm
IMMANUEL CAN (not Greta) wrote:...
I don't know how "free" the indigenous people in your area were. Ours warred endlessly on each other, kept slaves, rambled from place to place whenever the local territory was exhausted, had little in learning or technology (not even the wheel), and nothing in medicine, and were basically superstitious animists. Was that "free"? Maybe. But it wasn't "free" to do much.
These'll be those indigenous people who taught your pilgrims how to survive and saved them from starvation would it? Bet they wish they hadn't now.

With respect to the medicine, didn't save them from the typhus, measles, smallpox, et al that the pox ridden Christians brought with them.
AUK, that quote is Immanuel, not me.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Greta »

Immanuel, the conversation is too fragmented to be workable for me. As a windbag who likes to get a good roll :) on I'd rather focus on one of the point, where focus is not on which of our warring tribes is least bad, but what brings our tribes to both formation and to war.
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 2:11 pm
Greta wrote:...today's relatively gentle way of living.
"...relatively gentle"?
:shock:

See how "gentle" things are in the not-so-quickly-developing world...
Nonetheless, life is much more gentle today for many more people than ever before. I can think of no century or culture I'd rather live in than this period spanning the 20th and 21st centuries in the west. It sucks in many ways, yes, but nowhere near as much as in the past, most of which could be fairly described as horrific by our standards. Which century would most appeal to you?

The key question: Do you believe that modern humans are smarter, more morally aware, faster and stronger than ever before?

Or do you believe we are less so?

The question hopefully clarifies the natural dynamics at play - the creation of ever more empowered concentrations at the expense of the bulk. There is no shared fate for "humanity", if there ever was. As far as I can tell it's a matter of proportions. There is the bulk of humanity and there is the economic elite of humanity. They are different groups with different interests and different fates.

The emergence of humans represents the same dynamic. We humans are basically a concentration of complexity that dominates other non-microbial organisms. The dynamic is also seen in the process of encephalisation, and in insect metamorphosis - each time a complex, organised concentration dominated the simpler bulk.

Abiogenesis too was the emergence of complex concentrations that took control over their relatively passive peers. Now "big humans" are treating "little humans" effectively as farm animals, material stock or vermin. It's just nature.

Humans, en masse, have long been compelled to do things they don't actually like doing - moving towards its inevitable fate of non-sustainability and conflict as if they were under remote control, and following orders to walk over a cliff.

So we engage in the hell of war. We cram into unpleasantly crowded cities. The wealthy won't share and and nations compete rather than cooperate in the global interest. One wicked problem and tragedy of the commons after another, leading to a logical conclusion of destruction so obvious that it's been predicted for millennia. Humans have always sensed their inherent non-sustainability.

However, every apocalypse myth posits that the destruction is not complete, that some favoured souls survive. In context it seems that "blessed" and "wealthy" are synonymous.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Greta »

Londoner wrote: Thu May 25, 2017 4:40 pm... if they had the same weapons as Christians and atheists they would use them instead.
Yes. Terrorism is simply how one engages in warfare when at a large technological disadvantage. For the weaker combatant, the only access to the enemy is via their only unprotected zones - the citizenry. Everywhere else is mostly impregnable. If fundamentalist Muslims had been able to drop bombs on strategic military bases in the US and elsewhere they would have done so long ago.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Post by Immanuel Can »

Greta wrote: Fri May 26, 2017 1:20 am Which century would most appeal to you?
I'm not saying we're not privileged. I'm saying we're not average, and we're not typical of where the world is headed. This may very well be the best things get. But in many ways, it's been better. Look at warfare, disease, infanticide, international politics, or the environment, just for a start. There's no progress to see there...certainly not moral progress.
The key question: Do you believe that modern humans are smarter, more morally aware, faster and stronger than ever before?
No. I think human beings are pretty much what human being have always been. But "morally aware" is the really funny one. We've never, as a group, been more clueless or done worse things to each other than in the last century. We're not getting more moral, whatever else we're becoming.

However, I note we're getting away from the OP topic, so perhaps this is for another strand. We should be respectful of what the OP started.
Last edited by Immanuel Can on Fri May 26, 2017 2:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply