Protests in Iran
Dean
Also, protests against Islamic radicalism in Pakistan. Un-possible! You can't be a Muslim and oppose terrorism and oppression! Must be some kinda nasty trick.
(Via Instapundit.)
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
Also, protests against Islamic radicalism in Pakistan. Un-possible! You can't be a Muslim and oppose terrorism and oppression! Must be some kinda nasty trick.
(Via Instapundit.)
If so, all this is highly encouraging.
But none of this necessarily implies some sort of crusader-zionist plot against the true believers. Maybe -- just maybe -- everybody around the world comes to a point where they no longer tolerate someone fucking them over in the same of either an ideology or a religion.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
NO ONE is saying or insinuating that Moslems cannot support freedom/equality/modernity.
That would be like saying every cell in a sick body is unhealthy. An absurdity rarely claimed and not worth the time to refute.
Sick bodies are full of healthy cells, but those healthy cells have to contend with the higher than normal number of not-so-healthy cells the existence of which is precisely what makes the body in question "sick."
You are completely incorrect, and probably being naive. Tons of people are saying it constantly. Others obviously believe it because any time I post any positive story on Islam, some glum person comes around and says "that looks good but really there's no hope" or something like that. It's ridiculous.
Do not attempt to argue with me on this, I've had too many people tell me baldly, flatly, that Islam cannot support freedom, equality, or modernity--argued with me vociferously, at length, with much passion taking that position.
So don't call me a liar again, m'kay? Open your eyes. There are tons of people running around claiming exactly what you just said "nobody" is saying.
Get over it, Snippet: Islamophobia is real, and it's pretty sickening and destructive stuff.
You did not even address my point, even as you told me to stop disagreeing with you.
If there are in fact some people who believe that NOT ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL Moslem can ever advocate freedom, they are so few and far between that the statement, "No one is saying NO Moslems can support freedom" is perfectly adequate as a very slightly exaggerated generalization regarding one of the aspects of this debate.
Yes, some people are "glum" and some people are not hopeful about the short term prospects for freedom in that part of the world currently dominated by Islam. And some people even think Islam has something to do with the dimness of those prospects, but that does not mean they are saying ALL Moslems are incapable of believing in or advocating such things - ONLY that such people will face unusually difficult hurdles.
Islamophobia may be real, and so is racism and sexism and all the other "isms" that keep coming out of the woodwork. That doesn't render all suggestions that Islam is responsible for the backward state of that part of the world it dominates false or venal, and, furthermore, it is a statement that has nothing to do with my post.
I never said it isn't real, nor did my post even insinuate such a thing. All I am saying (AGAIN) is that your are greatly simplifying the "other side." in this particular discussion.
I have not called you a liar emkay? I don't know whether or not you really believe all or most people who disagree with you on this point are so stupid that they think ALL Moslems incapable of supporting freedom.
When you don't have the guns it ends up being useless. Ghandi and MLK could change the policies of their nations because they were dealing with civilized people. If these Iranian kids accomplish anything other than getting bullets behind their ears I'll eat a big helping of crow. One only needs to look at what happened in Lebanon last summer, and Iraq for the last three years to see what good idealism does you in the Middle East. It is worthless.
Snippet -- one good thing about your cancer metaphor is this: only a small percentage of cells are bad, but they make the entire body "sick." The metaphor is apt -- many Arab and Muslim countries are suffering under corrupt tyrranies of the few. The majority in every country are good, but suffering. And I'll stand by that. The majority of people in every Muslim country are good. Not perfect, but good; and this includes Palestinians!
This is specious to compare Lebanon and Iraq. Lebanon threw out its oppressor Syria with peaceful protests. And it has done them a lot of good. Is it perfectly stable? No, but it's doing okay, and it's gov't still hasn't given in to Hezbollah pressure. I'm hoping to go later this summer, so then I can report more, but I hear they are busy rebuilding.
One more time from the top:
NO ONE is saying or insinuating that Moslems cannot support freedom/equality/modernity.
Sorry, but do you know what the words "no one" mean?
In fact, MANY PEOPLE are saying EXACTLY that--that if you truly believe in Islam (which is the only definition of "Moslem" that matters) you cannot support these things. That is a FREQUENT argument, a FREQUENT assertion, and I've had it slapped at me more times than I can count.
So I would like you to now please back down, stop calling me a liar, acknowledge that some do in fact say exactly that---and, since we both agree that it's a stupid and ignorant and irrational thing to believe, we can move on.
In the meantime, everyone sane acknowledges that some aspects of the Islamic religion have had some contribution to the current state of affairs. So what? Obsessing over it as the primary issue is utterly ridiculous, because the gold standard proof already exists that it's not the primary problem. It's part of the mix. It needs to be treated like part of the mix--not the central point to obsess over.
The problem some people have, I think, is that somehow they got this notion that with a few waves of a magic wand, the Middle East would suddenly stop being a violent, ethnically torn region. It doesn't work like that. Reforms happen over a period of years.
Would you agree that many people say that Islam is inherently irrational and that accepting the essentials of Islam contradicts the essential foundations of a democracy, which is based on freedoms given to rational people?
I wholeheartedly agree with you regarding the cancer metaphor. That was PRECISELY my point.
I don't know if "real" Islam is INHERENTLY incompatible with democracy. It's putting up a hell of a fight, that's for sure.
Dean,
If you are making the by-definition-true argument that there are people who define Moslem in such a way that Islam and "secular" freedom/democracy/women/gay rights cannot coexist, then fine.
That's a different can of worms. Zarqawi clearly believed this and many Islamists do. Many Westerrs believe that such an observation is in accordance with Islamic scripture.
Such an argument would be that no REALY/TRUE/GENUINE Moslem could advocate democracy.
That's a theological how many angels can dance on the head of a pin type o' deal that doesn't interest me too much.
I was responding to the insinuation that some of "us" believe NO ONE WHO CALLS HIM/HERSELF A MUSLIM CAN ADVOCATE FOR FREEDOM.
I will accept your distinction, but I cannot say for sure what "TRUE ISLAM" really does ultimately stand for. I just respond to what it does/promotes/inspires.
The argument may not interest you too much, but many others make that exact argument, and it is quite offensive to people who see themseleves as real Muslims and real liberals and real democrats. It wouldn't hurt to acknowledge that others (though I suppose not you) make such arguments all the time. And if the argument doesn't interest you, why do you have a problem with Dean's arguing against the argument?
Will you accept that for many, Islam inspires a love for beauty, truth, and justice?
I do accept that for many, Islam inspires a love for beauty, truth, and justice.
Also, I would like to say that these Iranian protesters are showing a degree of courage that puts the vast majority of contemporary Western "Progressives/Liberals/Leftists" to shame.
Unlike their would-be counterparts in "The West," these guys are standing up for real freedom, not some sort of freebie handout or racial quotas or. Nor are they, unlike their Western counterparts, publically criticising those who they can be quite confident will never hurt them.
These guys are not posers. If they draw inspiration from Islam, more power to them. Such inspiration will stand compared to the less pleasant inspirations that come from Islam in a balanced assessment of this belief systems influence.
Those who believe the TRUE Moslems cannot advocate democracy will see nothing more in these Iranian kids than heresy - heresy deserving of a rather nasty punishment.
Dean's challenge means nothing to them. Why should a pro-Democracy American's claim that Islam is compatible with democracy impress them?
Not those who see Islam as an unusually powerful (though hopefully not invulnerable) democracy inhibitor.
There is a notion that somehow we have attempted to "impose" Democracy on Iraq. Since when do you "impose" fundamental human rights?
There is a notion that we are "no better than" Saddam because of Abu Ghraib and other mistakes. As if the Americans are running rape rooms, children's prisons, plastic shredders to feed dissidents through, or routinely cutting off the limbs of those who displease us. Or, in more extreme cases, cutting off the heads of those who offend us and forcing the families to pay an execution fee and to keep their loved ones' heads on their front lawns for a week or two at a time. All of which Saddam's regime routinely did.
There is a notion that we are at least as evil as the "insurgency," which routinely murders women and children and innocent men, because after all "we don't belong there."
As I have pointed out so many times, if we were genuine "imperialists" in Iraq, it's pretty clear what we'd do: we'd either have come in, killed Saddam and his supporters, and promptly left, OR, we would have never bothered with any of this silly election foolishness, would have simply seized the oil fields, installed a puppet dictatorship, and killed anyone who dared criticize us in any way in that country.
This is why I continue to find most left or "liberal" to be both morally and intellectually incoherent on this point. Including our friend Ali.
Since when did political progressivism and liberalism include making excuses for the vile monsters who make up the vast bulk of the Iraqi "insurgency?"
a sort of stalking horse for personal liberty.
lol
all religions are anti-freedom, in that they propose moral codes, dress and dietary restrictions, forced observance of prayer, etc.
America is a republic inspite of religious belief, not because of it.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.