I think both of you are right really. People can justify their traditions like mutilation, purdah and honor killings by using Islam but that doesn't mean those things are accepted by most Muslims and that they aren't influenced by older customs or that they come directly from the Quran or Hadith. It could be part of their adet which they regard as part of Islam.
It's not Islam, is it?
- Thread starter SS-18 ICBM
- Start date
I think both of you are right really. People can justify their traditions like mutilation, purdah and honor killings by using Islam but that doesn't mean those things are accepted by most Muslims and that they aren't influenced by older customs or that they come directly from the Quran or Hadith. It could be part of their adet which they regard as part of Islam.
Quackers
The Frog
islam affects nothing, and if you think it does your an islamophobe and a bigot. it's all down to culture.
H4run
Deity
I'm not trying to be stubborn here pointing the point over and over again but I will try to be fair to you by not refuting you completely as you also do the same to me.
Yes there are things that come from the culture and when Islam enter the area it still repeating and later seek the legislation of religion to make it seem right while it not true. For example, the muslim in south east Asia they remembering the death and read surah Yasin in 3 day, 100 day and 1000 day after the death pass away. This is something that never been order both in Quran and Hadith and it derive from Hindust tradition in Java. But they keep doing it until this very time and legalize these activity even make it obligatory, and argue even this is innovation (which are bad in Islam) but they change it into more positive value.
The example that I state above is a culture that out from Islam but when Islam enter and they start to convert to Islam they keep doing it but they changes the content to be Islamic. Make it as part of religious activity and part of the religion, while it is not.
While honor killing, multilation, face tatoo (Kurdish culture), drinking alcohol (Kosovo culture even they can be a muslim and Imam of Masjid they drink Alcohol) this is something contradict with Islam and against Islam and they keep it carry on because it is part of their culture and they hard to give it up even for Islam, because it something that their ancestor repeat over and over again, even it clearly wrong the very basic of Islamic doctrine so they can't innovate on it.
And I give you a wide example, for example many muslim drinking alcohol in kosovo as they call themselves as light muslim, who don't know the Quran forbid Alcohol? but why they do it? it is because their culture.
Also face tatoo in Kurdishtan. We muslim is forbid to have tatoo but why they have it?
But you can accept these example as part of their culture and out from Islamic boundaries aren't you? because this not contradict with your moral value while this is not part of Islamic teaching or any branch of Islamic interpretation this is culturally stuff that still carry on. And many muslim against this and try to change this despite you think it is good and no problem but Islam have rule.
Now I will give you the negative example that we all agree it is bad which are honor killing and multilation, this is something awful and it is part of the culture that against Islamic teaching but they still do that because of their culture, just like drinking alcohol remember?
It because They mother do it, they grand father do it, they grand grand father do it etc. And this have no place in any branch of Islamic interpretation of Quran and Hadith, also like drinking alcohol, it have no place also in Islamic innovation (bidah), this is something that they carry on stubbornly even they aware this is contradict with Islamic teaching.
I hope now you understand.
H4run
Deity
don't give me that sarcasm. I try to be as fair as possible. But you, sound like a true Islamophobs, like one of your quotation "the good Islamist is the death one".
And you fail to listen, just listen to your own mind about Islam.
Quackers
The Frog
I haven't actually read any of your posts. So don't take offense.
I'm just satirising the typical lefty response on these forums; the type whom will take every opportunity to lampoon and taint christianity or non-islamic religions with no limitations but who will then leap to teh defense and excuse the most bigoted and evil religion of the lot.
This is cultural imperialism
eh? good.
H4run
Deity
That is what I don't know, you can read it despite the languages barrier, but I must go now I can't answer your question in a short time like this until night.
Huh? As far as I've observed, the left generally treats all religions equally. If criticism is due, it is given, no matter if it's Islam or other religions, including Christianity. It's the right who treats Islam differently, and that deserves to be pointed out.
Of course you have to roll Islam and leftism together into one big conspiracy because you dislike both for dumb reasons.
The US is now giving the same aid, even more, to the Muslim Brotherhood controlled government.
Basically it is a bribe to keep the peace with Israel, not an endorsement of the government per se.
And Mubarak was hardly imposed by Americans on Egyptians. Egypt was ruled by autocratic dictators much before becoming an US ally. They should take a long look at themselves before blaming the US for all their problems. Mubarak had a vast support base within the country.
You keep calling it "this war". What war? Egypt is not at war with anyone. Most arab countries aren't at war nor facing drone strikes.
It is you who is forgeting there are far worse places in the word, where far more people are killed. There are places which were indeed far more mistreated by the West than the muslim world.
And yet they don't behave like troglodytes every time someone makes a low budget youtube video supposedely offending them.
I think only warpus mentioned "deserts" so far, and it really is a contributing factor. Charting 'water per capita' has some explanatory power. So does poverty.
Islam is also not a strong-enough worldview. It's not robust enough, morally.
And, to boot, their governments have been both crappy and crapped upon for some time.
Finally, we only really notice riots that're for stupid reasons or that are huge.
Islam is also not a strong-enough worldview. It's not robust enough, morally.
And, to boot, their governments have been both crappy and crapped upon for some time.
Finally, we only really notice riots that're for stupid reasons or that are huge.
No, the left does not treat all religions the same. See the enthusiasm that leftists such as Foucault embraced the Iranian Revolution (which is what lead Christopher Hitchens to break with the left). See how long it took for mainstream leftist figures to defend Salman Rushdie - in fact Rushdie was openly attacked by Labor politicians and the leftist establishment of British universities (for which he is bitter until today, as I personally saw him say in a literary festival). Look at threads about Islam and threads about Christianity in this very forum! Where is JollyRoger mocking Islam? Never saw it. Where are the countless "enlightened defenders of science" that always troll fundie christians? Compare the language leftists here reserve for say the Catholic Church and Islam.
It's not that Islam and leftism are in themselves connected (of course they aren't), but that a buch of leftists see Islam as a force against "American Imperialism"/ "Global Capitalism" / "The Jew" and thus think it's their duty to defend it.
Look at this map: http://pewresearch.org/assets/pewforum-muslim-project/weighted-map.htm
Have you seen these riots in Nigeria? Or in Indonesia? Or in Turkey? Or Bangladesh?
The fact that not all muslim countries have these kind of riots suggests that it is not just Islam that is the cause.
The problems with/in the muslim world are very diverse and have very many different causes, but I will try to name some. I am no expert, but these are some of the things I have seen mentioned in books and newspapers.
* Many countries seem to suffer from destabilizing influence from foreign organizations that are both supporting unrest financially and sending people there. Ever since Afghanistan was invaded by the Russians (and maybe even earlier, I don't know), there have been travelling groups of muslim warriors, fighting for their cause wherever in the world. The attack on the American embassy in Benghazi seems to have been done by such elements, but they are also involved in Syria, the conflicts in northern Pakistan/Afghanistan and the unrest in Russian Caucasus regions. They seem to get their money and people mostly from Arabia and possibly immigrants in Europe.
Such global, well funded, organisations can have a huge negative influence on relatively small states if they focus on that. A bit of topic, but this is not too dissimilar with American individuals donating to Jewish extremists, right wing parties like Wilders' PVV in Europe and (in the past) the IRA in Ireland. These donors, far away from the actual theater, can easily (be made to) believe they are helping some righteous fight for freedom.
* It is the economy, stupid! I think that some of the worst places, like Egypt and Pakistan, have problems with providing good economical opportunities to young people. In places with little economical mobility, problems tend to brew (see: Chicago). As long as people think they will be able to improve their live and that of their family through hard work, they will do so. As long as people believe their children will have a better life than themselves, they will be calm. As far as I know, the touristic east coast of Egypt (e.g. Sharm el-Sheikh) had little riots and problems during the fall of Mubarak. Tourism tends to be a business where anyone can make some money, as long as he works hard and well. The other parts of the economy in these countries tended to be controlled by the government/military/elite, with no opportunities for outsiders to enter. Sons of rich parents would get nice jobs and could afford nice girlfriends, sons of poor parents would be unemployed and unpopular on the marriage market. This obviously makes for angry young men, that can easily be motivated to join some fight for a noble cause, whether religious, nationalistic or otherwise.
Have you seen these riots in Nigeria? Or in Indonesia? Or in Turkey? Or Bangladesh?
The fact that not all muslim countries have these kind of riots suggests that it is not just Islam that is the cause.
The problems with/in the muslim world are very diverse and have very many different causes, but I will try to name some. I am no expert, but these are some of the things I have seen mentioned in books and newspapers.
* Many countries seem to suffer from destabilizing influence from foreign organizations that are both supporting unrest financially and sending people there. Ever since Afghanistan was invaded by the Russians (and maybe even earlier, I don't know), there have been travelling groups of muslim warriors, fighting for their cause wherever in the world. The attack on the American embassy in Benghazi seems to have been done by such elements, but they are also involved in Syria, the conflicts in northern Pakistan/Afghanistan and the unrest in Russian Caucasus regions. They seem to get their money and people mostly from Arabia and possibly immigrants in Europe.
Such global, well funded, organisations can have a huge negative influence on relatively small states if they focus on that. A bit of topic, but this is not too dissimilar with American individuals donating to Jewish extremists, right wing parties like Wilders' PVV in Europe and (in the past) the IRA in Ireland. These donors, far away from the actual theater, can easily (be made to) believe they are helping some righteous fight for freedom.
* It is the economy, stupid! I think that some of the worst places, like Egypt and Pakistan, have problems with providing good economical opportunities to young people. In places with little economical mobility, problems tend to brew (see: Chicago). As long as people think they will be able to improve their live and that of their family through hard work, they will do so. As long as people believe their children will have a better life than themselves, they will be calm. As far as I know, the touristic east coast of Egypt (e.g. Sharm el-Sheikh) had little riots and problems during the fall of Mubarak. Tourism tends to be a business where anyone can make some money, as long as he works hard and well. The other parts of the economy in these countries tended to be controlled by the government/military/elite, with no opportunities for outsiders to enter. Sons of rich parents would get nice jobs and could afford nice girlfriends, sons of poor parents would be unemployed and unpopular on the marriage market. This obviously makes for angry young men, that can easily be motivated to join some fight for a noble cause, whether religious, nationalistic or otherwise.
If water per capita is low, then you don't have agriculture, generally a major employer. Since it is the middle east, you probably don't have much industry either. You might have some tourism, but otherwise, there is little providing jobs. Of course, there is the government, but that tends to work along family lines in those places (if your father works there, you will get a job as well)
So, if your father didn't have a nice job, you probably will not either, and most of your life will be spent in poverty. What is stopping you from rioting?
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
Bingo.
And nice map. That certainly helps put things into perspective. Countries where these protests are occurring represent a tiny fraction of Muslims, and those who are participating represent a tiny fraction of the Muslims in those countries.
A few thousand people don't represent the views of over 1.5 billion. Nineteen deaths, mostly by cops doing exactly what many of the same people who are trying to blame Islam for this whined did not happen in Libya.
Alternatively,
Yeah, make them antisemites too
You're making the same mistake that's done with Islam. Only take the loudest elements of whatever ideological position (something as broad as "the left" cannot even be called that!) and generalize from there.
Those theories, while they of course do have some merit, do not explain why say there were mass protests and calls for Rushdie's murder by the muslim community in the UK when he published The Satanic Verses. The UK is hardly poor, or a desert. There has been no lack of religious violence in Turkey either.
Look, it's clear that Islam in abstract terms is not to blame. The Qu'ran is not any worse than the Old Testment or many other religious texts. The issue is that the mainstream interpretation of the Qu'ran is radical and, well, frequently evil. The same is not true for the mainstream intepretation of the Old Testment. Mainstream Islam is far more repugnant than mainstream Judaism or Christiniaty, and it's hypocritical to pretend otherwise. And of course there is no Jewish or Christian equivalent to Iran, or Saudi Arabia.
Why is this case? Of course, culture, history etc. all play a large role. But the fact remains there is something wrong with the muslim world, and denying it does nobody any good. When an idiotic amateur video on YouTube mocking Mohammed causes this much death and destruction there is something very wrong. Muslim sensitivity would be laughable if it were not so tragic.
Look, it's clear that Islam in abstract terms is not to blame. The Qu'ran is not any worse than the Old Testment or many other religious texts. The issue is that the mainstream interpretation of the Qu'ran is radical and, well, frequently evil. The same is not true for the mainstream intepretation of the Old Testment. Mainstream Islam is far more repugnant than mainstream Judaism or Christiniaty, and it's hypocritical to pretend otherwise. And of course there is no Jewish or Christian equivalent to Iran, or Saudi Arabia.
Why is this case? Of course, culture, history etc. all play a large role. But the fact remains there is something wrong with the muslim world, and denying it does nobody any good. When an idiotic amateur video on YouTube mocking Mohammed causes this much death and destruction there is something very wrong. Muslim sensitivity would be laughable if it were not so tragic.
Yeah, make them antisemites too
You're making the same mistake that's done with Islam. Only take the loudest elements of whatever ideological position (something as broad as "the left" cannot even be called that!) and generalize from there.
Some are moved by anti-semitism, yes. Not all of them, nor did I claim all of them were. As a German you ought to remember that several of your communist terrorists were also rabid anti-semites.
And I am not taking "the loudest elements". I am talking of Michel Foucault, of Labor MPs, or several Cambridge professors. All of them sided with the maniac Khomeini against a freakin' writer (well not Foucault who was already dead at the time of the controversy, but he was a prominent leftiss who was enthusiatic about the Iranian Revolution).
I suggest you read Hitchens' take of the left's attitude towards radical islamism.
Similar threads
