Why Western leftists adore right-wing religious extremists abroad

When the history of the West is written it will say: they educated themselves to hate themselves and love what they hate about themselves in the other.

On a fairly consistent basis people in the West embrace values abroad that they shun at home.

This is particularly odd and contradictory among those who self-identify as “Left” and “liberal” and then embrace movements, leaders, ideologies and religions that are manifestly illiberal and right- wing extremist abroad. For instance American philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler said in 2006 that “understanding Hamas [and] Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the left, that are part of the global left, is extremely important.

That contradictory view is emblematic of a phenomenon spanning everything from Michel Foucault’s embrace of the Islamic Revolution in Iran to those “anti-war” activists in the UK who support Syrian President Bashar Assad and Russia’s bombing of civilians.

Why do people who support women’s rights in the US or France excuse the Iranian regime? Why do those who dislike militarism view as romantic people in uniform in Pakistan or Moscow?

Why do those who dislike US presidential candidate Donald Trump find bombastic populists like Venezuala’s Hugo Chavez so endearing?

Why is Assad’s war on terror so good, but George W. Bush’s so bad?

Large numbers of commentators and intellectuals associated with the “Left” in the West have, for over 100 years, continually allied themselves with totalitarian, extremist, thuggish, populist, militarist, extreme right-wing, religious fanatical regimes and movements abroad.


Whether it was George Bernard Shaw touring and apologizing for Stalin’s Russia, or Noam Chomsky claiming refugees from the Cambodian genocide were “unreliable” and that “massacre reports were false,” there is a long tradition of mitigating the kinds of crimes abroad people would never excuse at home.

To understand this phenomenon we have to unpack what it means to be “left-wing” in the West. To be on the Left is to be good, to be progressive, to be for women’s rights, gay rights, environmentalism, social justice, worker’s rights, and to be against racism and discrimination, perhaps against nuclear energy, against war.

It didn’t always mean that.

Before the defeat of Nazism, to be left-wing was largely an ideological choice to be part of a “global Left” of various movements.

Although ostensibly for workers’ rights, right- and left-wing populist movements of the 1920s were essentially the same in their totalitarian fantasies. Since being “Left” was self-defined, it’s not clear what made the Khmer Rouge and its genocide any more “left-wing” than the Hutu genociders in Rwanda.

What made Arab nationalists of one variety, such as Palestinians, “left-wing” whereas those of another variety, such as the Lebanese Forces, “right-wing”?

Loyalty to these left-wing movements was largely ideological, if not contradictory. So Stalin was supported simply because some left-wingers in the West accepted the Soviet Communist Party’s line; others liked comrade Trotsky and therefore did not like Stalin. Not because they were liberals, but because the party told them so.

In those days the ideological Left wanted the West to look like the Soviet Union: a one-party state they would control.

When we get to the 1990s and the fall of Communism, the need to be loyal to a declining and dying official Left abroad was eroded.

But what to do about the void inside, the need to be loyal to fanatical, violent, extremist movements abroad? Where was the romance of “revolution,” as they called the genocide in Cambodia, the revolution of the “peasants” and “masses” and the lioniz- ing of mass murder in the name of populism?

To understand the blind and contradictory loyalty of people who call themselves “progressive” but embrace manifestly reactionary policies abroad is to understand that humans need to fill the void of rage within.

For the self-declared “Right” in the West that void is filled through home-grown nationalism. But the “Left” eschews nationalism at home. Yet the nationalism of the “other” is authentic and palatable. Discarding one’s own flag is de rigueur  but filling oneself up with the nationalism of the other is acceptable.

Thus the post-1990s embrace of religious fanaticism and right-wing nationalist extremism abroad has filled the void left by the fall of communism for the intellectual Left in the West.

Look at Chavez as a perfect example; a bloated, bullying, uniformed militarist and former coup leader turned into a “revolutionary internationalist” and praised. He had “uncompromising anti-imperialism” and mobilized “global unity against the main enemy.”

His “grassroots communal councils” were “engaging masses and building meaningful democracy.” Alan Woods in the London Progressive Journal warned of “sabotage” and the “lumpenproletariat riffraff” who were “causing mayhem” against poor Chavez.

Listen to how the Westerner describes the great leader: “Chavez always drew inspiration from contact with the revolutionary masses.” So why don’t they have Chavez in the UK or America? Men in uniform parading, the president’s voice booming on all channels, searching for “enemies,” “sabotage”?

A bit like Donald Trump, but more so.

Because the Westerner wants their “great leader” in Venezuala, not London, religious police to harass “immodest women” in Aceh, not Denmark. Nationalism abroad, pragmatism at home. Bolivarian Revolution abroad, internationalism at home.

Because Venezuelans pay the price now with mass hunger, as a recent BBC report noted, empty shelves, people unable to breastfeed because the country was destroyed by this populist, militarist nonsense.

Chavez was not a “progressive,” he was a right-wing militarist who passed himself off as left-wing in much the same way Hezbollah and Hamas, Bashar Assad and the ayatollahs are all “left-wing.”

WHEN LOOKING at the love and adoration some in the West have for the extreme Right abroad, one notices how people embrace diametric opposite values abroad and at home. They don’t like Jerry Falwell, but if he was Ayatollah Jerry al-Falwell, he’d be beloved and honored.

Rabbi Brant Rosen, who supports “social justice” in Chicago, went to Iran in 2008 and met men in robes with beards who represent the opposite of social justice. He wrote glowingly of the ethno-nationalism of “Persia, a country with a proud and venerable history...all Iranians young and old identify deeply with their ancient history....united in their reverence for Persian history.”

What about the Iranian minorities being brutally suppressed by the Persians, such as Kurds, Arabs, Azeris and Baluch? The American rabbi didn’t mention them, in fact his blog seems to indicate that they don’t exist.

In America social justice means acknowledging minorities, but those preaching social justice at home embrace rabid religious extremism abroad. No one would accept a law forcing women to cover their hair in Chicago, but in Iran they laugh and enjoy the forced religious observance.

Why is Persian nationalism or other foreign nationalism so enticing to some in the West? Because American, French or German nationalism is not.

Abroad is a place to pour one’s love of “proud nations.” It’s where one can openly worship verile, powerful men; nationalism, religious extremism, war, caning and hanging in public, beheadings, stonings – let out all that aggression that living in the West has cooped up.

The love of foreign nation and religion one finds in the writings of so many on the “Left” who ostensibly oppose nationalism is always interesting. The love of “pride,” faith, dignity and roots in the soil, of brawn and flag, of sword and gun, points to a nationalist yearning that the Western self-defined Left cannot allow them- selves at home.

The same values in Trump or Brexit, Le Pen or Lega Nord that the progressives find objectionable in the West, when expressed in Venezuala, Syria, Iran or among Palestinians are admirable.

Don’t kid yourselves and pretend these progressives simply don’t hear their friends in Iran call abortion “satanic” or hear them say homosexuals are a “cancer,” or hear their chauvinist friends in the Muslim Brotherhood say a woman’s “place is in the home.”

They hear it, and they support it. When the overweight, bearded religious leaders in Iran say “women and men are different; women are driven by their emotions,” the same people who speak of “gender neutrality” in the West widen their eyes and say “yes I agree, such an insight,” not “where is the transgender bathroom?”

When Hugo Chavez said he couldn’t be a homosexual because he was “sufficiently macho to pulverize any accusation along those lines,” gay rights advocates didn’t bat an eye. Homophobia is cool – only abroad, not at home.

If you took an average progressive lover of Hezbollah and told them to dunk in a fountain and be born again in Texas they’d mock “ignorant religion” – but take them to the Beka’a valley and tell them to whip them- selves for Ashura and they’ll find it beautiful.

This entire phenomenon is what should be known as “locational liberalism.”

Locational liberalism means you support liberalism only in one place, and support its diametric opposite somewhere else. The result is that there are basically two right-wing forces at war with each other in the West. One supports right-wing religious nationalist forces abroad, the other supports them at home.

The West’s fragile liberal values which took 1,000 years to achieve by eroding the power of religion, nationalism, racism, xenophobia and chauvinism stand no chance against the competing forces of the foreign right wing, the internal right wing and the internal locational liberal who betrays them at home and supports them abroad.

When the history of the West is written it will say: they educated themselves to hate themselves and love what they hate about themselves in the other.


http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Why-Western-leftists-adore-right-wing-religious-extremists-abroad-462978

Only a Right Wing Coward would think

The West’s fragile liberal values which took 1,000 years to achieve by eroding the power of religion, nationalism, racism, xenophobia and chauvinism stand no chance against the competing forces of the foreign right wing, the internal right wing and the internal locational liberal who betrays them at home and supports them abroad.

Guy is a loser no need to take his opinon in to consideration. WE achieve Despite Pessimistic failures. Nothing is ever gained by anyone by listening to Coward Crap post like the OP.

Progress is Progress and Will be achieved BY real Progressives that already do not give a crap about losers like the OP. No Progressive thinks progress will stop IF you think it might then you are not actually progressive.

Also Complete Strawman that doesn't even once touch on the left position, rather Falsely Claims that the Right wing propoganda is the left's position...

the biggest problem in the west is we are letting too many cowards that would simply be wetting their pants hiding in a hole if left to their own devices have say in the direction we take.

So as usual the left cannot counter the points it instead attacks the author with hate speech.
You have never been in battle, had children or been married and you have the audacity to claim you understand what it takes for a person to be a coward.
That is hilarious and you throw the word around with no comprehension to the meaning.
There is no strawman, again a failure to understand a terminology, where again the left continue to support tyrants, despots, murders etc throughout the last 100 years. Which was easily presented. I mean Noam Chomsky  a genocide denialist of the Cambodians, just shows up he has to be the worst regressive in history.

So let me know when you want to take on the facts presented in the article which was excellent, as I really have no insterest in your hate speech against a person for their article

Thanks

Cause they have no point other than they Do not Beleive is Progress..

that's fine but much like when you post athiest Authors to Raggs
Progressives will dismiss this Regressive Wanker as the Article is About How Progressive WILL fail How Progressive are the Wrong Way. He can think that But NO PROGRESSIVE COULD you cannot be dedicated to an ideal you beleive already lost.

Plus No one on the LEFT SAYS THE FORIEGN RW IS GOOD
Only the RW say that.
So the main claim in the OP is False. literally an article which from the outset one cant logically dismiss as a strawman article as the 'supposed lefty' they claim feels this way DOES NOT EXIST!!.

And if you cant understand the MULTIPULE times Ben has explained the differnece between a progessive opinon like he holds and the regressive Nonsense you post then there is no hope as You are not deabting the Lefts Opinon at all.
Just a made up opinon that no one holds Because it is DUMB!!
so Yeah rather than debate the real points people are making lets just pretend they are making a simplistically stupid point instead. that is all this artclie does it is just a RW wankfest, as make beleive as the bible or Koran.

veya_victaous wrote:Cause they have no point other than they Do not Beleive is Progress..

that's fine but much like when you post athiest Authors to Raggs
Progressives will dismiss this Regressive Wanker as the Article is About How Progressive WILL fail How Progressive are the Wrong Way. He can think that But NO PROGRESSIVE COULD you cannot be dedicated to an ideal you beleive already lost.

Plus No one on the LEFT SAYS THE FORIEGN RW IS GOOD
Only the RW say that.
So the main claim in the OP is False. literally an article which from the outset one cant logically dismiss as a strawman article as the 'supposed lefty' they claim feels this way DOES NOT EXIST!!.

And if you cant understand the MULTIPULE times Ben has explained the differnece between a progessive opinon like he holds and the regressive Nonsense you post then there is no hope as You are not deabting the Lefts Opinon at all.
Just a made up opinon that no one holds Because it is DUMB!!
so Yeah rather than debate the real points people are making lets just pretend they are making a simplistically stupid point instead. that is all this artclie does it is just a RW wankfest, as make beleive as the bible or Koran.

1) This was contradicted as they end up supporting people and groups that are not progressive and againts the well being and equality of others.

2) Sorry had no understanding of this point. Athiest authors speak on religion and its wrongs, they also admit that some good comes out of religions. No idea why you are dragging Rag into this making a false claim now also. Athiests tend to be the most progressive people and do you know why? They are not restrained but abosolute morals as found within religions. They are free to follow any political belief system but the majoirty back the well being and equality of people.

3) Yes they do say the foreign RW are good because they wrongly back people who have little left wing views when in fact they are RW. Did you even read the article on the likes of extremist groups like Hamas and leaders like Stalin and Chavez etc? None of their views looked towards the people and actually denied countless people human rights. If you want to class them as left wing leaders, that is fine.

4) Ben is like you a regressive, he thinks speaking out against an ideology is bigoted even though he does it daily in regards to Republicanism. It makes him the worst form of hypocrite. He is not concerned if or whether he upsets Republicans, but shys away from crirticism of Islam or Islamists in case he may offend Muslims.

This sums up the left position well:

Failure of the left

It isn’t difficult to understand that there is a problem within Islam today. It also isn’t difficult to realise that the required change can only come about from within.

It is never the majority within a minority that revolts. Oppression and fear are powerful tools. Generally, a small group begin pushing for legal freedoms or equality. Rebellious elements within the minority gain the attention of progressive elements in wider society and forge a revolutionary alliance that eventually heralds change.

That is the way most of our freedoms have been gained. Until now, until Islamism. Progressive movements within Islam are actually being shunned. For whatever reason, revisionists, reformists, humanitarians within the Muslim community are knocked back, not by the right, but by the left. Our left wing organisations build alliances with radical or extreme Islamic elements and are therefore pushed towards rejecting the reformists. This is an absolute failure of the left to support the very ideals that are displayed clearly on their own flags.

Many of the more extreme Islamic groups operating in the UK are misogynistic, homophobic, anti-democratic and refuse to condemn all violence. And yet they are courted, promoted and strengthened by those who should in reality be the first in line to demonstrate against them. We have to ensure that Muslims do not experience racial hatred, that they enjoy equality, but at no point does an acceptance of Islamism conform to our vision of an inclusive society. Promoting many of the more extreme Islamic groups fosters rather than eases social tensions, especially internally amongst Muslims. Yet progressive think tanks like Quilliam which seeks to create a more self-critical approach within Muslim society have problems gaining air time or support. Which brings me to Islamophobia.

Islamophobia

Critics of Christian society are publicly applauded and treated like celebrities. Anti-Zionist Jews are given exposure well beyond their statistical relevance to Jewish society. Yet every word regarding criticism of Islam is met with a stony silence or a rebuke. We are fed with slogans like ‘Islam is the religion of peace’, this, even as the entire Middle East burns in the flames of Islamic extremism. As Christians and Jews are told they need to take responsibility for all their actions, the Muslims are shielded behind a wall that cannot be breached. Islamic extremism is the fault of the western world, Christianity, of Israel.

It was the terror attack in Nice that finally made me realise what real Islamophobia is. It is the fear of silence that Islamism generates within society. Why does our ‘free press’ refuse to call a spade a spade when it comes to Islamic terror? Islamophobia.
The word is incorrectly being applied as a cover for Islamic extremism, through which any action, regardless of how violent, cannot be labelled as being related to Islam. Islam cannot have a problem. If we mention it, we become Islamophobic, we become targets for public rejection, or retribution. Who would want to place themselves in that situation?

The Muslim children at schools who are wearing a more conservative dress code because others in the school began to do so are Islamophobic. The victim of FGM or honour violence who cower in silence in fear of further action from a family member, they are Islamophobic too. The Israeli who cannot identify as Israeli at university, the Jew who will not publicly wear a Kippa, all Islamophobes.
Our teachers, our local politicians, our unions, our universities, they all suffer from Islamophobia. The woman in Nice is Islamophobic, not because she is biased against Muslims, but because the right to air her opinions has clearly been stifled through the effect of radical Islamic threats and violence.

If you cannot stand up and suggest there are deep rooted issue within Islam that need reform, if you cannot stand by those like Quilliam who seek that reform, if you cannot directly state the connection between the terror attack and Islam, then you too are suffering from Islamophobia.


http://david-collier.com/?p=2146

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:Cause they have no point other than they Do not Beleive is Progress..

that's fine but much like when you post athiest Authors to Raggs
Progressives will dismiss this Regressive Wanker as the Article is About How Progressive WILL fail How Progressive are the Wrong Way. He can think that But NO PROGRESSIVE COULD you cannot be dedicated to an ideal you beleive already lost.

Plus No one on the LEFT SAYS THE FORIEGN RW IS GOOD
Only the RW say that.
So the main claim in the OP is False. literally an article which from the outset one cant logically dismiss as a strawman article as the 'supposed lefty' they claim feels this way DOES NOT EXIST!!.

And if you cant understand the MULTIPULE times Ben has explained the differnece between a progessive opinon like he holds and the regressive Nonsense you post then there is no hope as You are not deabting the Lefts Opinon at all.
Just a made up opinon that no one holds Because it is DUMB!!
so Yeah rather than debate the real points people are making lets just pretend they are making a simplistically stupid point instead. that is all this artclie does it is just a RW wankfest, as make beleive as the bible or Koran.

1) This was contradicted as they end up supporting people and groups that are not progressive and againts the well being and equality of others.

2) Sorry had no understanding of this point. Athiest authors speak on religion and its wrongs, they also admit that some good comes out of religions. No idea why you are dragging Rag into this making a false claim now also. Athiests tend to be the most progressive people and do you know why? They are not restrained but abosolute morals as found within religions. They are free to follow any political belief system but the majoirty back the well being and equality of people.

Not the point I was making
the point is As A progressive I am going to respond to a regressive they same way (like athiest is the opposite of Christian) the Op is clearly an Attack on Progess by an Individual Deeply commited to the Regressive cause (thus them writing such a regressive article)

3) Yes they do say the foreign RW are good because they wrongly back people who have little left wing views when in fact they are RW. Did you even read the article on the likes of extremist groups like Hamas and leaders like Stalin and Chavez etc? None of their views looked towards the people and actually denied countless people human rights. If you want to class them as left wing leaders, that is fine.
NONE of those are example from the West.. Can you see the STRAWMAN in the trying to debate Western Left wing ideology with NON-western Left wing Politicans. May as well being making comments on buddhist monks to describe Christians. the relevance is naught.

4) Ben is like you a regressive, he thinks speaking out against an ideology is bigoted even though he does it daily in regards to Republicanism. It makes him the worst form of hypocrite. He is not concerned if or whether he upsets Republicans, but shys away from crirticism of Islam or Islamists in case he may offend them.

No, Again you are strawmaning Ben. Ben is Not defending THEM, he is condeming you. THAT doesn't mena he supports them just that he doesn;t support You and the world is not Binary there are other options than hate the other guy. just because they hate us doesn't require us to hate them back. that doesn't mean we agree.
it means we know we will WIN because we have 100% faith in Progress because we are Progressives.

you are the poster on here that constantly Suggest that Progress is weak and fragile and can be easily destoryed by these backward ass arcahic ideals. that is Anti-Progressive trying to convince people the battles are already lost.
but is laughable, Progress will occur. the other ideals will be destoryed. if you think that is anything but inevitable, then you are not Truly progressive since you lack faith in progress.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


1) This was contradicted as they end up supporting people and groups that are not progressive and againts the well being and equality of others.

2) Sorry had no understanding of this point. Athiest authors speak on religion and its wrongs, they also admit that some good comes out of religions. No idea why you are dragging Rag into this making a false claim now also. Athiests tend to be the most progressive people and do you know why? They are not restrained but abosolute morals as found within religions. They are free to follow any political belief system but the majoirty back the well being and equality of people.

Not the point I was making
the point is As A progressive I am going to respond to a regressive they same way (like athiest is the opposite of Christian) the Op is clearly an Attack on Progess by an Individual Deeply commited to the Regressive cause (thus them writing such a regressive article)

3) Yes they do say the foreign RW are good because they wrongly back people who have little left wing views when in fact they are RW. Did you even read the article on the likes of extremist groups like Hamas and leaders like Stalin and Chavez etc? None of their views looked towards the people and actually denied countless people human rights. If you want to class them as left wing leaders, that is fine.
NONE of those are example from the West.. Can you see the STRAWMAN in the trying to debate Western Left wing ideology with NON-western Left wing Politicans. May as well being making comments on buddhist monks to describe Christians. the relevance is naught.

4) Ben is like you a regressive, he thinks speaking out against an ideology is bigoted even though he does it daily in regards to Republicanism. It makes him the worst form of hypocrite. He is not concerned if or whether he upsets Republicans, but shys away from crirticism of Islam or Islamists in case he may offend them.

No, Again you are strawmaning Ben. Ben is Not defending THEM, he is condeming you. THAT doesn't mena he supports them just that he doesn;t support You and the world is not Binary there are other options than hate the other guy. just because they hate us doesn't require us to hate them back. that doesn't mean we agree.
it means we know we will WIN because we have 100% faith in Progress because we are Progressives.

you are the poster on here that constantly Suggest that Progress is weak and fragile and can be easily destoryed by these backward ass arcahic ideals.  that is Anti-Progressive trying to convince people the battles are already lost.  
but is laughable, Progress will occur. the other ideals will be destoryed. if you think that is anything but inevitable, then you are not Truly progressive since you lack faith in progress.

1) Made zero sense again, as athiesm is simply no belief in a deity. It means nothing else, so again you decide to invent and make things up to suit again a hate you have of athiesm. Again Athiesm alloows people to form any views they have, because they are not restricted by absolute morals

2) Again failing to understand the point again, how is being human rights abusers left wing, if as stated left wing values  is to be good, to be progressive, to be for women’s rights, gay rights, environmentalism, social justice, worker’s rights, and to be against racism and discrimination, perhaps against nuclear energy, against war.  Are you claiming all these groups and leaders have all these values?
So again you throw in a word again of which you do not understand and attempt the worst form of debating to try and discount facts by a psuedo word, strawman.

3) Again deflection, and I am not concerned whether Ben condemns me or not, that avoids the issue. Ben is very out spoken on political ideologies like Republicanism, but Islamism is a neo-conservative religious ideology, just as Republicanism is, based off Christian beliefs as well. So you have two very similar religious political ideologies. One the Christian one he constantly denounces, the other he constantly defends. That is hypocrisy in its worst form.

Now does Ben fear Republicamism being in power?
Lets see if he will answer that point?

4) You the  end with the most unfounded accusation to date. I state the same as I do to all bad ideologies, that they are a constant threat to progression, which we still see happen in the US. If I speak out on new State laws in some US states, that look to discriminate against minority groups like homosexuals, i am appluaded. If I speak out on Islamism doing the same, I am wrongly classed a bigot or Islamophobic, a poor baseless invented word to protect Islam. I then am subjected to abuse thrown, attempts to censur me and shout me down. No ideology should be protected from criticism or ridicule, that just endorses Blasphemy. You protect people from discrimination and hate which is different which in would be anti-Muslim hate you defend against. You are the one that falsifies constant claims against people Veya, and you do this to deflect as you simple have not the intellect to understand this.

1.
I don't hate atheism just the new atheist sect.
That is because they a ruining a good thing, the move away from organized religion could have opened up and age of seeking knowledge but almost immediately there is a group try to define the universe by our current knowledge again, which is literally what the old religious books are.. thus no improvement/progress in humanity

2.
because western leftism has been influenced by the likes of Martin Luther King. (even though he was religious) the core difference in western leftism as opposed to the economic leftism of all those examples is that one of the core ideals is that all people should be treated as individuals and judged on the content of their character not their skin colour, gender, sexual preference or religion... etc.

3.
Well I can only assume for Ben, since i am not him, that it is because he lives in the USA and thus directly affected but it politics and a big component of that is the Republicans. Why he doesn't so vocally condemn them is because he doesn't harbor desires for 'colonialism' and the 'need to control things' (I honestly think he is better person than me in that regard), he acknowledges that his nation is not perfect and shouldn't be too judging of others. What can I say Ben is a nice guy that would like to get his 'own house in order' first

4. this actually goes back to 3. you want to much absolute control (don't worry, I have the same fault )
Big picture, these places will change if we can move the ourselves forward further, they always have in the past.. SO while it is not perfect, as yes it does allow people suffer in those places, it is the most realistic path to progress further..

My personal opinion is probably 'harder' than Ben's, I am not that worried it is their lives after all, which is why i support immigration... if someone is smart enough to want to come here, then we should give them a chance. But i do realize it is easier said then done.
If i were given Absolute power Yes i would do like you suggest and remove the organized religions, but we don't have that and the cost in both human suffering and delay in progressing further means it is an unreasonable exception, and not really good ideologically.

1) Gibbeirsh, what athiest sect? You mean they are furthering peoples understanding and this is ruining their lives they are getting better eduated? How so, you mean you want people to remain dumb?

2) Martin Luther King would have jump in his grave at the actions of the likes of you and Ben, where he would of spoken out against hateful people, where you seek to defend them. Again you confuse an ideology and people, thinking an idology should be protected. He spoke out against the ideology of racism and did not fear to offend whites in the process. So again you are now making the worst and poorest argument  based off no comparrison in history and putting up revisionist history. He certainly did not promote hate speech against whites and I am not promoting hate speech against Muslims. I can be critical and question the acts and beliefs of Muslims

3) So is politics a big aspect of Islam, poor deflection and avoiding the point. What you are saying is myths should be exempt from criticism and ridicule, because they have zero evidence. You are saying its okay for Ben to ridicule Republicanism, but not any country based on religious laws in other words theocracy, religious legal systems etc.

wow

4) Again you then end with yet more pathetic immature accusations, which you cannot back up with a single peice of evidence. So all you do is left with no choice after I have made you look very simple on the subject is then try to deligitimize me with lies.
I dont care whether you are harder then Ben, I sugges you use that erection as people might think you have a problem walking around with one.

So you failed to as per usual address many of my points, invent things I have not said and as usual when you fail to do so, attempt to deligitimise me.

So nothing about control but for people to see the problems of bad ideologes themselves and how they are often being manipulated with lies, that control them through religion.

I meerely wish to help set them free.

Ben's ears must be burning.

Didge, nobody has ever been "set free" by having some outsider group come in and tell them everything they believe in is evil.

If it was possible to change people's minds by being condescending to them, you'd have everybody here agreeing with you by now.

Ben Reilly wrote:Didge, nobody has ever been "set free" by having some outsider group come in and tell them everything they believe in is evil.

If it was possible to change people's minds by being condescending to them, you'd have everybody here agreeing with you by now.

Really?

How do you think slavery ended?

How about the end of the criminalization of homosexuals?

How about women obtaining the vote?

How about homosexuals being able to marry?

I see you then end with yet again a poor accusation where again I am not being condescending, which then leads me to believe you are again being insensitive to nothing abusive I have said.
If reasoning you can be hypocritical upsets you, then the fault lies within yourself, not me

Whta's the matter Ben?
Have i again made your points look ever so simpleminded again?
The fact is there is no doubt your views are utterly in conflict.
You have no issue even attacking neo-christian conservatism, but shy away from any form of criticism of Islam, due to a fear you may upset some Muslims, but have care over upseting Christians or Republicans. So you fear to offend Muslims an thus not only is Blasphemy having you bow down in fear. It has also made you so fear Islam, you cannot speak out critically against it.
That sadly would make you an Islamophobe, based off this fear.

I suggest you think about that, or actually start showing balance to alll religious neo-conservative beliefs.

Didge wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Didge, nobody has ever been "set free" by having some outsider group come in and tell them everything they believe in is evil.

If it was possible to change people's minds by being condescending to them, you'd have everybody here agreeing with you by now.

Really?

How do you think slavery ended?

How about the end of the criminalization of homosexuals?

How about women obtaining the vote?

How about homosexuals being able to marry?

I see you then end with yet again a poor accusation where again I am not being condescending, which then leads me to believe you are again being insensitive to nothing abusive I have said.
If reasoning you can be hypocritical upsets you, then the fault lies within yourself, not me

I guarantee you that slavery didn't end, women didn't get the vote, gay rights weren't recognized, by activists telling the mainstream, "Listen, you ignorant cavemen, your values are inferior to mine and I'm here to drag you kicking and screaming into the light."

Change like that comes from stoking empathy, first and foremost. Then consensus is built and alliances are formed.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:


Really?

How do you think slavery ended?

How about the end of the criminalization of homosexuals?

How about women obtaining the vote?

How about homosexuals being able to marry?

I see you then end with yet again a poor accusation where again I am not being condescending, which then leads me to believe you are again being insensitive to nothing abusive I have said.
If reasoning you can be hypocritical upsets you, then the fault lies within yourself, not me

I guarantee you that slavery didn't end, women didn't get the vote, gay rights weren't recognized, by activists telling the mainstream, "Listen, you ignorant cavemen, your values are inferior to mine and I'm here to drag you kicking and screaming into the light."

Change like that comes from stoking empathy, first and foremost. Then consensus is built and alliances are formed.

Again wrong, the African slave trade was voted for in British parliment to end and it succeeded against the majority view of the day.
Again all these things changed because people were cirtical of where it had been controlled by religion previously.
So again your history is so poor I am now starting to laugh in your face.
Are you telling me people were not openly critical on these issues within the time?

I will allow you the ability to bowout with your head firmly lodged up your own backside

Didge wrote:Whta's the matter Ben?
Have i again made your points look ever so simpleminded again?
The fact is there is no doubt your views are utterly in conflict.
You have no issue even attacking neo-christian conservatism, but shy away from any form of criticism of Islam, due to a fear you may upset some Muslims, but have care over upseting Christians or Republicans. So you fear to offend Muslims an thus not only is Blasphemy having you bow down in fear. It has also made you so fear Islam, you cannot speak out critically against it.
That sadly would make you an Islamophobe, based off this fear.

I suggest you think about that, or actually start showing balance to alll religious neo-conservative beliefs.

More strawmanning. I've already delivered the insult to Islam that would offend most Muslims more deeply than anything else I could ever say, and I'll deliver it again:

There is no god.

Now, you know I condemn violence and oppression by anyone doing it, so why are you pushing this idea that I defend it?

Ben Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Whta's the matter Ben?
Have i again made your points look ever so simpleminded again?
The fact is there is no doubt your views are utterly in conflict.
You have no issue even attacking neo-christian conservatism, but shy away from any form of criticism of Islam, due to a fear you may upset some Muslims, but have care over upseting Christians or Republicans. So you fear to offend Muslims an thus not only is Blasphemy having you bow down in fear. It has also made you so fear Islam, you cannot speak out critically against it.
That sadly would make you an Islamophobe, based off this fear.

I suggest you think about that, or actually start showing balance to alll religious neo-conservative beliefs.

More strawmanning. I've already delivered the insult to Islam that would offend most Muslims more deeply than anything else I could ever say, and I'll deliver it again:

There is no god.

Now, you know I condemn violence and oppression by anyone doing it, so why are you pushing this idea that I defend it?

OMG bravo, give that man a medal
Seriously, by default as athiest makes you believe there is no god.
So you are saying Muslims are over sensitive on that as well, when it states:
"There is no compulsion in religion"?
So how could it be an insult?
You see this is what you do, offer up a get out clause, claim strawman, when I have reasoned you often spout are critical of Republicanism and even ridicule them and yet when it comes to Islam, we see the opposite.
Please do not insult my intelligence with that load of crap

Also we are not talkling about condeming violence here in this instance and I cannot believe you think that. When this is about bad ideas and bad beliefs.
Ideologies

OH and one last thing before I go Ben

My arguments and reason on this thread have been "steel man", not "strawman"

Catch you later

Didge wrote:Also we are not talkling about condeming violence here in this instance and I cannot believe you think that. When this is about bad ideas and bad beliefs.
Ideologies

Okay, so we're assuming huge populations of people all subscribe to an ideology that we've defined in the context of our societies rather than theirs.

So because of that, should I claim that the vast majority of Republicans think exactly like Donald Trump?

Ben Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Also we are not talkling about condeming violence here in this instance and I cannot believe you think that. When this is about bad ideas and bad beliefs.
Ideologies

Okay, so we're assuming huge populations of people all subscribe to an ideology that we've defined in the context of our societies rather than theirs.

So because of that, should I claim that the vast majority of Republicans think exactly like Donald Trump?

Where did i claim that?
All will subscribe in varying degrees to an ideology, that is not even the point.
You will condemn trump based off his hate and polices do you not?
That means you are being critical of beliefs does it not?
Do I really have to dumb this down further for you to finally grasp this?
Now not all Muslims believe the same, not all Muslims are terrorists but Millions do subscribe to beliefs that discriminate and are prejudiced and you fail to condemn these belieefs and in fact defend such bad beliefs, because whenever are you outspoken against them?
Please write somethinng next time that is at least worth me botheriing to reply to lol

No wonder you are continually confused on this.
You keep continually thinking in terms of people and not the beliefs themselves and the ideologies themselves.
No wonder you are in such conflict over your views and how they are hypocritical

Now anything intelliegnt to add or is it truely a waste of time even trying to make you think rationally for even 5 seconds?

Steel man
Sometimes the term "steel man" is used to refer to a position's or argument's improved form. A straw man is a misrepresentation of someone's position or argument that is easy to defeat: a "steel man" is an improvement of someone's position or argument that is harder to defeat than their originally stated position or argument.

Was I misrepresenting Ben?
No
He does fail to condemn many poor beliefs in Islam and has admitted to doing so through not wanting to upset Muslims. Which he has stated before. Now he has no fear though of upsetting Republicans and Christians, if they hold neo-conservative beliefs. Which is ironic as Islamism is a neo-conservative religious political ideology.


Consclusion

Regressive hypocrisy in action by the left.

Right really have to go, but if as Ben believes there is no point speaking out on many things like prejudice, discrimination, inequality, oppression etc. As he wrongly believes has never happened in history, even though he is an athiest himself and clearly did listen or read views that swayed his thinking. Then why does he even bother then to speak out on anything and be critical of anything if he is such a defeatest?

Do you know why I think you are a defeatest Ben?
Because more than anything the progression in the US is that much stagnated, where other western nations are constantly progressing. Does it make the US the least progressive?

No, but ceratinly one of the slowest and why?
Because there is still strong literal religious belief in the states based around neo-conservatism.

Have a good evening.

Didge wrote:Right really have to go, but if as Ben believes there is no point speaking out on many things like prejudice, discrimination, inequality, oppression etc. As he wrongly believes has never happened in history, even though he is an athiest himself and clearly did listen or read views that swayed his thinking. Then why does he even bother then to speak out on anything and be critical of anything if he is such a defeatest?

Do you know why I think you are a defeatest Ben?
Because more than anything the progression in the US is that much stagnated, where other western nations are constantly progressing. Does it make the US the least progressive?

No, but ceratinly one of the slowest and why?
Because there is still strong literal religious belief in the states based around neo-conservatism.

Have a good evening.

Progress in the U.S. is stagnated? We just legalized gay marriage across the entire country -- you've still got Northern Ireland to go. Your country has never had a minority head of state, ours has -- and he was elected by the people to boot, rather than appointed by his party.

Your country has recently elected to risk its global standing over irrational fears about immigrants.

The U.S. took a huge step toward universal health care just seven years ago and the leading candidate in the presidential race wants to take it further.

Oh, can you legally use marijuana in any part of the UK?

Ben Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Right really have to go, but if as Ben believes there is no point speaking out on many things like prejudice, discrimination, inequality, oppression etc. As he wrongly believes has never happened in history, even though he is an athiest himself and clearly did listen or read views that swayed his thinking. Then why does he even bother then to speak out on anything and be critical of anything if he is such a defeatest?

Do you know why I think you are a defeatest Ben?
Because more than anything the progression in the US is that much stagnated, where other western nations are constantly progressing. Does it make the US the least progressive?

No, but ceratinly one of the slowest and why?
Because there is still strong literal religious belief in the states based around neo-conservatism.

Have a good evening.

Progress in the U.S. is stagnated? We just legalized gay marriage across the entire country -- you've still got Northern Ireland to go. Your country has never had a minority head of state, ours has -- and he was elected by the people to boot, rather than appointed by his party.

Your country has recently elected to risk its global standing over irrational fears about immigrants.

The U.S. took a huge step toward universal health care just seven years ago and the leading candidate in the presidential race wants to take it further.

Oh, can you legally use marijuana in any part of the UK?

And yet certain states based off religious beliefs are trying to and have introduce discrminating laws against homosexuals transexuals ect, abortions as well. That means any step forward is being pulled back by the religious neo conservative right. Who again you will be highly critical over but any Islamic neo conservatism, you are as quite as a mouse over.

The point on brexit has to be the most fear based load of bullshit I have ever heard.
When the main reason is we have still unemployment, an infrustructure that cannot keep up with or maintain the levels of people coming into this country at present. Which means some people are not against or for immigration, they believe it needs to be controlled. We are losing many skilled workers going abroad and then not training enough new ones as its easier and far quicker to emply foreign skilled workers, thus meaning far less then enter these skilled areas to learn from.
You look at a situation again so blindly, all you look through is the racism glass.
You seem to forget that the Uk already has 7 million foreign born people, let alone the many descended from foreign people who have come here, which means the Uk has been taking in immigration far before the colonisation ever took place of both the US and Australia.
So its not about different ethnic groups coming here, but about limitations and also screening properly people coming here.

We have had a free health care system for decades and yours is still not universally free and you claim that is progression?

Really?

Like I say the US is stagnated and why?
Literal religious neo conservative belief

no...but we can all get acess to medical care ...regardless of income

Didge wrote:1) Gibbeirsh, what athiest sect? You mean they are furthering peoples understanding and this is ruining their lives they are getting better eduated? How so, you mean you want people to remain dumb?

2) Martin Luther King would have jump in his grave at the actions of the likes of you and Ben, where he would of spoken out against hateful people, where you seek to defend them. Again you confuse an ideology and people, thinking an idology should be protected. He spoke out against the ideology of racism and did not fear to offend whites in the process. So again you are now making the worst and poorest argument  based off no comparrison in history and putting up revisionist history. He certainly did not promote hate speech against whites and I am not promoting hate speech against Muslims. I can be critical and question the acts and beliefs of Muslims

3) So is politics a big aspect of Islam, poor deflection and avoiding the point. What you are saying is myths should be exempt from criticism and ridicule, because they have zero evidence. You are saying its okay for Ben to ridicule Republicanism, but not any country based on religious laws in other words theocracy, religious legal systems etc.

wow

4) Again you then end with yet more pathetic immature accusations, which you cannot back up with a single peice of evidence. So all you do is left with no choice after I have made you look very simple on the subject is then try to deligitimize me with lies.
I dont care whether you are harder then Ben, I sugges you use that erection as people might think you have a problem walking around with one.

So you failed to as per usual address many of my points, invent things I have not said and as usual when you fail to do so, attempt to deligitimise me.

So nothing about control but for people to see the problems of bad ideologes themselves and how they are often being manipulated with lies, that control them through religion.

I meerely wish to help set them free.

And they WANT TO EB FREE FROM YOU !!!!
so leave them alone
YOU ARE NOT KING

And you just proved my point 100%
You have no right to force you defintion of freedom on them
to think you do is Naracstic in the extereme, the fact you cannot anaylise your owen faults is testiment to your lack of self perception
And exactly the reason people like you make things worse.

regressive attitudes that push for a return to colonialism when You MAY have had the sligthest chance of beind able to Dictate like you cannot accept that you Cannot do now!!

Didge wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Didge, nobody has ever been "set free" by having some outsider group come in and tell them everything they believe in is evil.

If it was possible to change people's minds by being condescending to them, you'd have everybody here agreeing with you by now.

Really?

How do you think slavery ended?

How about the end of the criminalization of homosexuals?

How about women obtaining the vote?

How about homosexuals being able to marry?

I see you then end with yet again a poor accusation where again I am not being condescending, which then leads me to believe you are again being insensitive to nothing abusive I have said.
If reasoning you can be hypocritical upsets you, then the fault lies within yourself, not me

Each and Every one of those, the socities reached the conculsion that it was the right thing to do themsleves.
All of them
Who Forced the USA to end slavery? or the UK or France? no one each decided to do it in their own good time.
same with decriminalising Homosexuality and Womens voting

You prove Ben point

Ben Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Didge, nobody has ever been "set free" by having some outsider group come in and tell them everything they believe in is evil.

If it was possible to change people's minds by being condescending to them, you'd have everybody here agreeing with you by now.

Really?

How do you think slavery ended?

How about the end of the criminalization of homosexuals?

How about women obtaining the vote?

How about homosexuals being able to marry?

I see you then end with yet again a poor accusation where again I am not being condescending, which then leads me to believe you are again being insensitive to nothing abusive I have said.
If reasoning you can be hypocritical upsets you, then the fault lies within yourself, not me

I guarantee you that slavery didn't end, women didn't get the vote, gay rights weren't recognized, by activists telling the mainstream, "Listen, you ignorant cavemen, your values are inferior to mine and I'm here to drag you kicking and screaming into the light."

Change like that comes from stoking empathy, first and foremost. Then consensus is built and alliances are formed.

this is the difference between a progressive and didge.

A Real progressive looks FORWARD as they step into the light
they Look toward further Progress, and know that if they keep moving forward
the ignorant cavemen will follow. because progress leads to success.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Really?

How do you think slavery ended?

How about the end of the criminalization of homosexuals?

How about women obtaining the vote?

How about homosexuals being able to marry?

I see you then end with yet again a poor accusation where again I am not being condescending, which then leads me to believe you are again being insensitive to nothing abusive I have said.
If reasoning you can be hypocritical upsets you, then the fault lies within yourself, not me

Each and Every one of those, the socities reached the conculsion that it was the right thing to do themsleves.
All of them
Who Forced the USA to end slavery? or the UK or France? no one each decided to do it in their own good time.
same with decriminalising Homosexuality and Womens voting

You prove Ben point

I never proved Ben right at all

They all still followed ideologies, where they viewed humans as subservant to them and thus it was based on a view to look at other people inferior to them.

It was actually people speaking out against slavery that brought about eventual changes.
In the Uk it took many attempts in parliment at a time when many people were profitting from the slave trade.
William Wilberforce suceeded against the odds.,
In the US it took a war that cost many lives, which only came about near the end of that conflict
But again people were driving for change by being out spoken
So on both counts you are wrong

veya_victaous wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

I guarantee you that slavery didn't end, women didn't get the vote, gay rights weren't recognized, by activists telling the mainstream, "Listen, you ignorant cavemen, your values are inferior to mine and I'm here to drag you kicking and screaming into the light."

Change like that comes from stoking empathy, first and foremost. Then consensus is built and alliances are formed.

this is the difference between a progressive and didge.

A Real progressive looks FORWARD as they step into the light
they Look toward further Progress, and know that if they keep moving forward
the ignorant cavemen will follow. because progress leads to success.

Is that why I back progressive Muslims who look to progress islam then, which by your view makes me a progressive.

Both you and Ben are happy and within your rights to challenge any political belief and even do so with some religious beliefs like Christianity, as they are simply ideologies.
Islam is an ideology that has views as does Christianity and Judaism, that are prejudice.
What has happened in the west though is because of enlightenment, equality, secularism and science have helped changed religious peoples perceptions. Where they have adapted these concepts into their faiths. Not all of them as you still have literal Christians who follow neo conservatism in the US. Just as we see there is many Muslims that follow neo-Conservative Islamism.
You both thougfh fail to speak out on the exact same prejudice formed by the Christian Right with the Islamic Right in Islamism.
You continue to be regressive by shielding any criticsm, even though its the same prejduices found within both.
So its you stagnating society and progression by keeping it from going forward
I wish to enlightened by education.
You want to build a wall of silence to protect an ideology from critism of its bad beliefs
That wis not progression, as you then end up defending those who promote prejudice with this shild you have invented based off a poor misconception you believe it is bigotry against Muslims.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:1) Gibbeirsh, what athiest sect? You mean they are furthering peoples understanding and this is ruining their lives they are getting better eduated? How so, you mean you want people to remain dumb?

2) Martin Luther King would have jump in his grave at the actions of the likes of you and Ben, where he would of spoken out against hateful people, where you seek to defend them. Again you confuse an ideology and people, thinking an idology should be protected. He spoke out against the ideology of racism and did not fear to offend whites in the process. So again you are now making the worst and poorest argument  based off no comparrison in history and putting up revisionist history. He certainly did not promote hate speech against whites and I am not promoting hate speech against Muslims. I can be critical and question the acts and beliefs of Muslims

3) So is politics a big aspect of Islam, poor deflection and avoiding the point. What you are saying is myths should be exempt from criticism and ridicule, because they have zero evidence. You are saying its okay for Ben to ridicule Republicanism, but not any country based on religious laws in other words theocracy, religious legal systems etc.

wow

4) Again you then end with yet more pathetic immature accusations, which you cannot back up with a single peice of evidence. So all you do is left with no choice after I have made you look very simple on the subject is then try to deligitimize me with lies.
I dont care whether you are harder then Ben, I sugges you use that erection as people might think you have a problem walking around with one.

So you failed to as per usual address many of my points, invent things I have not said and as usual when you fail to do so, attempt to deligitimise me.

So nothing about control but for people to see the problems of bad ideologes themselves and how they are often being manipulated with lies, that control them through religion.

I meerely wish to help set them free.

And they WANT TO EB FREE FROM YOU !!!!
so leave them alone
YOU ARE NOT KING

And you just proved my point 100%
You have no right to force you defintion of freedom on them
to think you do is Naracstic in the extereme, the fact you cannot anaylise your owen faults is testiment to your lack of self perception
And exactly the reason people like you make things worse.

regressive attitudes that push for a return to colonialism when You MAY have had the sligthest chance of beind able to Dictate like you cannot accept that you Cannot do now!!

Show me where I am forcing anything on anyone?

You then based on your own poor uneducated views, think you speak for everyone else.

That general happens when people fear change, they do everything to they can to censure education, if they fear it will help set people free.

See again you invent nonsense and make unfounded claims

Helping set people free with education, is what leads to stop for example a family being wrongly told by the catholic church to not wear condemns in Africa, which greatly ends up further suffering in a country where there is poverty and starvation.
Educating people who are being told poor and bad ideas, helps to minimise child deaths and sexually transmitted diseases

So how is that me forcing anything onto them?

I am not using fear as the Catholic church is doing, in regards to, when they are basing a fear off protected sex being a sin.

You see you can come at me all day Veya with the continued poor unfounded claims, but if you think that education and helping set people free with kjnowledge is a bad thing. Then you have failed to learn a single thing that has helped shape the very rights you have today. From people bringing about education to people. Giving them the freedom to tchoose.

So ask yourself, why in certain Muslim countries, are such teachings censured and denying the freedom of choice for people?

So are you also saying there is no point as happened before about teaching equality and secualrism, that provides people from protection from discrimination?

Or are you happy to see people continually persecuted, as women, homosexuals and minority groups are within many Muslim countries?
Do you think its wrong to speak out against oppression now, when people hold poor bad beliefs taught from an ideology?

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Really?

How do you think slavery ended?

How about the end of the criminalization of homosexuals?

How about women obtaining the vote?

How about homosexuals being able to marry?

I see you then end with yet again a poor accusation where again I am not being condescending, which then leads me to believe you are again being insensitive to nothing abusive I have said.
If reasoning you can be hypocritical upsets you, then the fault lies within yourself, not me

Each and Every one of those, the socities reached the conculsion that it was the right thing to do themsleves.
All of them
Who Forced the USA to end slavery? or the UK or France? no one each decided to do it in their own good time.
same with decriminalising Homosexuality and Womens voting

You prove Ben point

I never proved Ben right at all

They all still followed ideologies, where they viewed humans as subservant to them and thus it was based on a view to look at other people inferior to them.

It was actually people speaking out against slavery that brought about eventual changes.
In the Uk it took many attempts in parliment at a time when many people were profitting from the slave trade.
William Wilberforce suceeded against the odds.,
In the US it took a war that cost many lives, which only came about near the end of that conflict
But again people were driving for change by being out spoken
So on both counts you are wrong

Was William English?
yes, so you prove bens point that it was not some wanker from overseas telling them they were evil, it was progress within their own society.
Same with the USA, it was a civil war.

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

I guarantee you that slavery didn't end, women didn't get the vote, gay rights weren't recognized, by activists telling the mainstream, "Listen, you ignorant cavemen, your values are inferior to mine and I'm here to drag you kicking and screaming into the light."

Change like that comes from stoking empathy, first and foremost. Then consensus is built and alliances are formed.

this is the difference between a progressive and didge.

A Real progressive looks FORWARD as they step into the light
they Look toward further Progress, and know that if they keep moving forward
the ignorant cavemen will follow. because progress leads to success.

Is that why I back progressive Muslims who look to progress islam then, which by your view makes me a progressive.

Both you and Ben are happy and within your rights to challenge any political belief and even do so with some religious beliefs like Christianity, as they are simply ideologies.
Islam is an ideology that has views as does Christianity and Judaism, that are prejudice.
What has happened in the west though is because of enlightenment, equality, secularism and science have helped changed religious peoples perceptions. Where they have adapted these concepts into their faiths. Not all of them as you still have literal Christians who follow neo conservatism in the US. Just as we see there is many Muslims that follow neo-Conservative Islamism.
You both thougfh fail to speak out on the exact same prejudice formed by the Christian Right with the Islamic Right in Islamism.
You continue to be regressive by shielding any criticsm, even though its the same prejduices found within both.
So its you stagnating society and progression by keeping it from going forward
I wish to enlightened by education.
You want to build a wall of silence to protect an ideology from critism of its bad beliefs
That wis not progression, as you then end up defending those who promote prejudice with this shild you have invented based off a poor misconception you believe it is bigotry against Muslims.

No you just cant stop looking backwards to where Islam is.

who cares what some ignorant hillshepherd beleives
IF we have progressed our Science to the point we are more capable then their god?
You want to tie yourself to everyone? then you will not move forward cause there are plenty of fools on earth trying to take it backwards.
cut yourself free from their nonsense and move forward with out them, that is evolution.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


I never proved Ben right at all

They all still followed ideologies, where they viewed humans as subservant to them and thus it was based on a view to look at other people inferior to them.

It was actually people speaking out against slavery that brought about eventual changes.
In the Uk it took many attempts in parliment at a time when many people were profitting from the slave trade.
William Wilberforce suceeded against the odds.,
In the US it took a war that cost many lives, which only came about near the end of that conflict
But again people were driving for change by being out spoken
So on both counts you are wrong

Was William English?
yes, so you prove bens point that it was not some wanker from overseas telling them they were evil, it was progress within their own society.
Same with the USA, it was a civil war.

No William Wilberforce was English so you are again wrong on history

What a surprise

Not

That is not proving Ben's point at all

He was a leader among a movemnt of people to aboplish the slave trade, that for the time is an outsider group not accepted by the majority. He had to fight to win over people

You really talek a load of rubbish

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Is that why I back progressive Muslims who look to progress islam then, which by your view makes me a progressive.

Both you and Ben are happy and within your rights to challenge any political belief and even do so with some religious beliefs like Christianity, as they are simply ideologies.
Islam is an ideology that has views as does Christianity and Judaism, that are prejudice.
What has happened in the west though is because of enlightenment, equality, secularism and science have helped changed religious peoples perceptions. Where they have adapted these concepts into their faiths. Not all of them as you still have literal Christians who follow neo conservatism in the US. Just as we see there is many Muslims that follow neo-Conservative Islamism.
You both thougfh fail to speak out on the exact same prejudice formed by the Christian Right with the Islamic Right in Islamism.
You continue to be regressive by shielding any criticsm, even though its the same prejduices found within both.
So its you stagnating society and progression by keeping it from going forward
I wish to enlightened by education.
You want to build a wall of silence to protect an ideology from critism of its bad beliefs
That wis not progression, as you then end up defending those who promote prejudice with this shild you have invented based off a poor misconception you believe it is bigotry against Muslims.

No you just cant stop looking backwards to where Islam is.

who cares what some ignorant hillshepherd beleives
IF we have progressed our Science to the point we are more capable then their god?
You want to tie yourself to everyone? then you will not move forward cause there are plenty of fools on earth trying to take it backwards.
cut yourself free from their nonsense and move forward with out them, that is evolution.

So now you are just talking about me
Say I cannot look at where islam is

I can

Then make more absurd accusations

I have moved forward, you are still stick back in time, along with all the previous religious people from a Christian sects who still wish to reverse equality and to be able to discriminate against homosexual and women in the US.

I Go one step forward all the time, you are going back two steps all the time.

So you do not want to join me champion the equal rights for women, homosexuals and minority rights in Muslim majority countries under oppression, in countries like North Korea where its Christians who are the most peresecuted and China who persecutes countless Muslims?

You want to not speak out and do nothing

I said 'You cannot stop looking', not 'you cant look'
I am Suggesting you stop looking backward and look forward instead
but Since Islam is backward, you keep looking backwards.

And No clearly I am going forward with a far greater Technology and new world focus than You.

So you do not want to join me champion the equal rights for women, homosexuals and minority rights in Muslim majority countries under oppression, in countries like North Korea where its Christians who are the most peresecuted and China who persecutes countless Muslims?

No, because then i would risk becoming as bad as them.
the point you keep missing.
I do NOT beleive that you will ever succeed by trying to bully them into progress.
Thus Rather than Waste effort on that, I would Direct the effort into Advanceing Our OWN societies further.

veya_victaous wrote:I said 'You cannot stop looking', not 'you cant look'
I am Suggesting you stop looking backward and look forward instead
but Since Islam is backward, you keep looking backwards.

And No clearly I am going forward with a far greater Technology and new world focus than You.

So you do not want to join me champion the equal rights for women, homosexuals and minority rights in Muslim majority countries under oppression, in countries like North Korea where its Christians who are the most peresecuted and China who persecutes countless Muslims?

No, because then i would risk becoming as bad as them.
the point you keep missing.
I do NOT beleive that you will ever succeed by trying to bully them into progress.
Thus Rather than Waste effort on that, I would Direct the effort into Advanceing Our OWN societies further.

Gotcha

That is an unfounded fear Veya, which you claim of others.
Nobody is bullying anyone by teaching.
Its how the west changed from a theocratic society to a secular society and this was done by listening and allowing ourself to challegne previous poor beliefs.
Your view would still  see the west in the dark ages and not having ever progressed
So thanks for telling everyone you do not want to champion the plight of the oppressed, which includes, women, homosexuals, minority ethnic and religious groups, including Christians and Muslims

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:I said 'You cannot stop looking', not 'you cant look'
I am Suggesting you stop looking backward and look forward instead
but Since Islam is backward, you keep looking backwards.

And No clearly I am going forward with a far greater Technology and new world focus than You.

So you do not want to join me champion the equal rights for women, homosexuals and minority rights in Muslim majority countries under oppression, in countries like North Korea where its Christians who are the most peresecuted and China who persecutes countless Muslims?

No, because then i would risk becoming as bad as them.
the point you keep missing.
I do NOT beleive that you will ever succeed by trying to bully them into progress.
Thus Rather than Waste effort on that, I would Direct the effort into Advanceing Our OWN societies further.

Gotcha

That is an unfounded fear Veya, which you claim of others.
Nobody is bullying anyone by teaching.
Its how the west changed from a theocratic society to a secular society and this was done by listening and allowing ourself to challegne previous poor beliefs.
Your view would still  see the west in the dark ages and not having ever progressed
So thanks for telling everyone you do not want to champion the plight of the oppressed, which includes, women, homosexuals, minority ethnic and religious groups, including Christians and Muslims

the west didn't listen to anyone else
it was westerners pushing progress in the west that caused progress in the west.

And when you regress to Colonial attutdes, as you are doing, with your false beleif that you are championing a cause by insulting the people you think you are teaching. You cannot be teaching Beause you mention gods and religion which YOU DONT HAVE AN ANSWER FOR, you have an opinon. Shouting your opinon at people is not teaching.
IF you want to teach them, teach Science. pretty fucking easy, their shit is wrong, so if they learn the truth that can be seen as the truth because it works they will eventually convert to it as the west has done. Because you can Pray OR you can take this pill. Eventually evolution will sort it out all those that choose to prayer over pills.

Anyway, you keep on fucking around, wasting time and resources on hill shepherds the still believe in magic sky giants.

while I keep working towards the tech-god and worry about Actually Progressing Humanity

You live too much in the past sunshine and now think the west is an entity.
This is 2016 and during the cononial period, we acted as bad as we see from within Muslim countries today and you want us to remain like that and not challenge.


That is all people need to know you would rather humanity remained oppressive and not progressed
You then again invent more gibberish claiming I am shouting
In every post you just invent countless loads of crap up, think we should abolish education, as its forcing views on people and allow people to suffer and remain stupid.

lol

I need not say anything more, you have just again proven you are clueless Veya

You remain in the 7th century alongside other desert raiders and pillagers, whilst the rest of us live in progress into harmony

You do realise that a shepherd is a protector?

Even your insults backfire on you

Lions do not need a shepherd
Do you realise you see yourself as a sheep
by the post above.
Or maybe a protector of sheep
Well, I am a lion, I eat sheep.

Progress is the not the oppsite of Oppress.
you are oppressed or Free
you have progress or regress

the fact you are still concnered with Problems we have solved in our societies shows you are regressive, Your Mind is focused on the past. If it wasn't you would not have such issue with religion, but you Cant stop looking behind you like a regressive person is Inclined to do. (I know you gonna to post regressive nonsense about How Forcing YOUR opinon on others is progress)

And YES I do think this hypocritcal nonsense of demonise and discriminate to stop them demonising and discriminating makes you a hypocrite.

Like victor says they are not my tribe, So NOT my say in their education or religion or traditions (unlike victor I am delighted to have them come and join my tribe in they posess the congnative capacity to see it is the right path) Like I said original you want Absolute Control YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT RIGHT, NO you don't get that right cause you think your right.



YOU ARE NOT EDUCATING
get it though your head,
You are NOT EDUCATING ANYONE
NO ONE LEARNS From people acting like You do!!!

veya_victaous wrote:Lions do not need a shepherd
Do you realise you see yourself as a sheep
by the post above.
Or maybe a protector of sheep
Well, I am a lion, I eat sheep.

Progress is the not the oppsite of Oppress.
you are oppressed or Free
you have progress or regress

the fact you are still concnered with Problems we have solved in our societies shows you are regressive, Your Mind is focused on the past. If it wasn't you would not have such issue with religion, but you Cant stop looking behind you like a regressive person is Inclined to do. (I know you gonna to post regressive nonsense about How Forcing YOUR opinon on others is progress)

And YES I do think this hypocritcal nonsense of demonise and discriminate to stop them demonising and discriminating makes you a hypocrite.

Like victor says they are not my tribe, So NOT my say in their education or religion or traditions (unlike victor I am delighted to have them come and join my tribe in they posess the congnative capacity to see it is the right path) Like I said original you want Absolute Control YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT RIGHT, NO you don't get that right cause you think your right.



YOU ARE NOT EDUCATING
get it though your head,
You are NOT EDUCATING ANYONE
NO ONE LEARNS From people acting like You do!!!

Lions need a pack and are very similar to sheep, as a single lion when outcasted struggles to survive as they hunt in packs.
So even your knowledge there is piss poor again
And in anyone is shouting it is you using caplocks
If you are a lion and I am a shephard, then I am a human and have a gun to shoot you dead
I am not a sheep, as you claimed we are hill shephards and the best thing to do with a danger to my flock is to shoot that pest dead.

Your next points is even further gibberish
You are oppressed by por bad beliefs, which you wish to maintain by abolishing education as you believe teaching people education is wrong, even though at no point have you said to stop religious teachings. Which makes your whole point even more daft beyond belief.
Oppression continues and is maintained unless it is challenged and when challenged and people see that is wrong, you find progression
So again your view is utterly gibberish

If things have not been solved,m they we have not fully progressed.
Why is it in America they ahave created state laws that are oppressive against women on abortions and the LGTB?
Religion by any chance Veya?
You see you just keeping spouting the same load of rubbish and where we have problems again in thew west they stem again from piss poor religious beliefs which you have no problem still being taught, but think real education is oppression.
Anyone with an ounce of intelligence must be reading this and laughing at you

The debate was over ages ago anyway, you just cannot accept your views are living in the past, they back oppression and do not want to help the oppressed as you freely admit.

I doubt anyone wants to belong to your tribe, as it does not have an education system, wants to allow oppression and not to speak out against oppression.
I think your tribe would be called "Billy no mates"

I shall leave people to see for themselves and no doubt laugh at some of the crap you have come out with today.

I hav easily shown and utterly destroyed your views

So I shall now leave you to sulk

Enjoy

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

No you just cant stop looking backwards to where Islam is.

who cares what some ignorant hillshepherd beleives
IF we have progressed our Science to the point we are more capable then their god?
You want to tie yourself to everyone? then you will not move forward cause there are plenty of fools on earth trying to take it backwards.
cut yourself free from their nonsense and move forward with out them, that is evolution.

So now you are just talking about me
Say I cannot look at where islam is

I can

Then make more absurd accusations

I have moved forward, you are still stick back in time, along with all the previous religious people from a Christian sects who still wish to reverse equality and to be able to discriminate against homosexual and women in the US.

I Go one step forward all the time, you are going back two steps all the time.

So you do not want to join me champion the equal rights for women, homosexuals and minority rights in Muslim majority countries under oppression, in countries like North Korea where its Christians who are the most peresecuted and China who persecutes countless Muslims?

You want to not speak out and do nothing

So if you think something should be done why don’t you actually do something rather than preaching to around a dozen people on here? Why don’t you sign up and volunteer to go and fight ISIS rather than expect our young men and women to go and do it for you? With the time you spend on here it may be that you have no real commitments that are stopping you. Sure I read that you are as fit as a fiddle and well able to complete the Royal Marine course across the terrain so with your self- assessed fighting skills you look ideal for the job and well able to knock off a few Muzzies no problem.
Are you man enough? Have you got the guts or do you expect others to do what you are not prepared to do yourself?

Here’s one organisation where you can make a start and sign up
How to volunteer to fight ISIS in Syria, in eight steps

http://fusion.net/story/324193/fight-isis-syria-war-kurds/

First of all you will have to be able to identify how to tell the difference between ISIS and Muslims and there’s a cartoon in there to help you.

Keep us posted on progress.

What did I say is the best way to defeat ISIS?

You see another one acting off the emotions of a poor misleading view based around all Muslims.

I back progressive Muslims sassy that back equality and want to progress Islam, as we saw with Christianity. Through enlightenment, equality, secularism, education and science, that people then adapt these aspects into their faith.

You see you act with anger again, because you are blinded unable to look at what is best to defeat hate?

Education itself, that challenges poor beliefs.

You want to defend poor beliefs, because when I am critical of islam you only see Muslims.

When i am critical of Christianity, you see the wrongs in Christinity and will speak out on them.

The same in Judaism.

Clearly the problem is within yourself that you get over defensive on Islam, based on the insensitivities of a faith being challenged.

Like I say again

You end up endorsing Blasphemy, when you fail to challenge bad beliefs

How many more homosexuals, women, religious minorities have to suffer before you realise this?

So basically you are too cowardly to act on what you say, full of hot air and, as my nan used to say, all mouth and trousers, in other words, gobby but no guts.

sassy wrote:So basically you are too cowardly to act on what you say, full of hot air and, as my nan used to say, all mouth and trousers, in other words, gobby but no guts.

I think you will find its the other way round

My way to fight extremism, is to speak out on the aspects of that ideology that they feed off

You though fail to condemn where it is prejudice.

If you think speaking out on bad beliefs makes me a coward

i will wear that badge with pride sassy

Of course you will, because slagging off Muslims on a tiny forum is so brave in your warped head and you don't have the guts to do anything and being unable to face that fact, you have to find a way of justifying that ti yourself lol

sassy wrote:Of course you will, because slagging off Muslims on a tiny forum is so brave in your warped head and you don't have the guts to do anything and being unable to face that fact, you have to find a way of justifying that ti yourself lol

Thank you for proving my point again, read slowly:


What did I say is the best way to defeat ISIS?

You see another one acting off the emotions of a poor misleading view based around all Muslims.

I back progressive Muslims sassy that back equality and want to progress Islam, as we saw with Christianity. Through enlightenment, equality, secularism, education and science, that people then adapt these aspects into their faith.

You see you act with anger again, because you are blinded unable to look at what is best to defeat hate?

Education itself, that challenges poor beliefs.

You want to defend poor beliefs, because when I am critical of islam [b]you only see Muslims.[/b]

When i am critical of Christianity, you see the wrongs in Christinity and will speak out on them.

The same in Judaism.

Clearly the problem is within yourself that you get over defensive on Islam, based on the insensitivities of a faith being challenged.

Like I say again

You end up endorsing Blasphemy, when you fail to challenge bad beliefs

How many more homosexuals, women, religious minorities have to suffer before you realise this?