Why Islam is a problem for the integration of immigrants

[Lexicus]

Then why did you say there is an 'underlying reality' to race, reflected in things like greater prevalence of sickle-cell anemia?

 

[Agent327]

Time for the 'Nobody Knows' joker.

 

[Slaughter]

Islam is simply incompatible with western/christian civilization.
The right thing is for both to stay where they are and trade goods in peace. Muslims live in muslim land, Christians in Christian land. Anyone who tries to cross the borders with dubious/hostile intent gets blow out of the ground as they should.

There's no reason for us to live in their land, and no reason for them to live in ours.

 

[Synobun]

Islam is simply incompatible with western/christian civilization.
The right thing is for both to stay where they are and trade goods in peace. Muslims live in muslim land, Christians in Christian land. Anyone who tries to cross the borders with dubious/hostile intent gets blow out of the ground as they should.

There's no reason for us to live in their land, and no reason for them to live in ours.

Does this mean you refuse to step foot on any property owned by a Muslim?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Islam is simply incompatible with western/christian civilization.
The right thing is for both to stay where they are and trade goods in peace. Muslims live in muslim land, Christians in Christian land. Anyone who tries to cross the borders with dubious/hostile intent gets blow out of the ground as they should.

There's no reason for us to live in their land, and no reason for them to live in ours.

There's probably no reason for anyone to live in yours. I certainly have no interest.

 

[bernie14]

There's probably no reason for anyone to live in yours. I certainly have no interest.

I can think of a few but involving bacon and shellfish

 

[Agent327]

Islam is simply incompatible with western/christian civilization.
The right thing is for both to stay where they are and trade goods in peace. Muslims live in muslim land, Christians in Christian land. Anyone who tries to cross the borders with dubious/hostile intent gets blow out of the ground as they should.

There's no reason for us to live in their land, and no reason for them to live in ours.

Besides this being absurdly simplistic, it's also incorrect. First, 'Western civilization' is as much an abstractum as ' Islam' is. We're dealing with nations and integration as citizens of such nations. Secondly, history argues against you by letting Christians migrate to Muslim countries and vice versa. Apparently, there was nothing incompatible with that. Mind you there have been efforts to propose such an incompatibility, which, overall have failed, sometimes following disastrous results of such ' incompatibility policies'. There's nothing inherently incompatible with anyone's beliefs that should make someone incompatible with a modern nation. The point of a modern nation is precisely that they can encompass any citizen willing to abide by its laws, regardless of religion. and, interestingly, that's precisely what ' our values' proclaim. Isn't that a coincidence.

 

[Traitorfish]

Islam is simply incompatible with western/christian civilization.

Well, which is it, "Western" or "Christian"? If it's Western, the Armenians, Copts and Ethiopians are out, if it's "Christian", then the entire pre-Christian world is out. If you insist on both, then Islam is going to sneak in through the holes in whatever Scrapheap Challenge theory of pagan-Jewish synthesis you construct up to make the Egyptian-born Moses a European and the Greek-born Muhammad Ali Pasha an African. Your can't have it both ways.

The right thing is for both to stay where they are and trade goods in peace. Muslims live in muslim land, Christians in Christian land.

Spoiler :

So good luck with that, I guess.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I've been getting very interested in this "Western Civilization" that alt-right posters here presume to speak on behalf of. I've tried to press a couple of them on what they mean by the concept before they've stormed off in a huff, leaving us ****s to our echo-chamber. I've never found that they have any interest in what generally goes under that term "Western Civilization," what I understand by it: an imagined umbrella linking a group of nations that trace a culture and history back to, say, Homer. Western Civilization, as it seems to me they understand the term, is nothing more than a present-day territory, (roughly commensurate with the NATO nations, maybe) with just a single "cultural" feature--namely, it's present-day superiority in technological innovation. Or maybe two features: technological superiority plus more egalitarian governmental systems (though don't press them on the mutual tolerance and respect that makes democracies work effectively). So, it's a very flattened image of what I think of when I think of Western Civ. One doesn't get the sense that they're impassioned admirers of Rembrandt, or Schubert or Aeschylus, or what have you. Their idea of the West is flattened, as I say, mostly to a region of the globe that they happen to inhabit, and that, in their presentation, seems to be defined, as much as anything, by its standing ever in danger of Islamic suicide bombers. The West's institutions of government are asserted to be superior, but aren't trusted to be sufficiently superior that Muslims might acknowledge that superiority and willingly adopt the mores and contribute to the functioning of the West's societies.

I sometimes encourage them to lean in to their chauvinism, to have the courage of their convictions about the West's overawing the barbarians with the manifest superiority of its culture, but they'll have none of it. The West simultaneously towers as the unquestionably best culture on the planet and cowers in abject fear of being overwhelmed by the barbarians.

As someone who has a real fondness for the old vision of "Western Civilization," it saddens me to see the concept flattened in the alt-right's new makeover.

 

[Lexicus]

As someone who has a real fondness for the old vision of "Western Civilization," it saddens me the concept flattened in the alt-right's new makeover.

There is nothing new about the alt-right's conception of Western Civilization.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Well, fair enough. Although I think the radical presentism on which my post focused might be new.

But in any case there is this other available meaning that some other people othertimes hold, and that meaning is meaningful to me.

 

[Traitorfish]

There is nothing new about the alt-right's conception of Western Civilization.

It's even more confused than its predecessors, for what that's worth. "The West" used to be defined fairly narrowly as the inheritance of the Western Empire, a Latin-Germanic cultural zone stretching from Naples to Oslo and Lisbon to Vienna, perhaps with a few concession made to Slavic and Magyar Catholicism if the speaker was of a charitable disposition. The alt-right want to claim this definition, while also extending "the West" to the borders of Europe, and then again to the furthest reaches of Christendom, and they want all three of these definitions to be true at the same time.

 

[Lexicus]

It's even more confused than its predecessors, for what that's worth. "The West" used to be defined fairly narrowly as the inheritance of the Western Empire, a Latin-Germanic cultural zone stretching from Naples to Oslo and Lisbon to Vienna, perhaps with a few concession made to Slavic and Magyar Catholicism if the speaker was of a charitable disposition.

I dunno, I'm not at all certain this is any less self-contradictory, or entails less false projection onto history, than the more expansive definition of the West alt-righters seem to use now.

 

[Traitorfish]

I dunno, I'm not at all certain this is any less self-contradictory, or entails less false projection onto history, than the more expansive definition of the West alt-righters seem to use now.

Oh, it's nonsense, but it's consistent nonsense, nonsense chiseled from the hard granite of nineteenth century bloody-mindedness. When they said "Asia begins at the Elbe", they meant it. Today, they just make it up as they go along, based on what seems sensible to them at any given moment.

And in that respect, it's fairly harmless, because it takes about five seconds to understand that when they say "Western civilisation" they mean "white supremacy", and we can all move on with our day. What's more worrying to me is when liberals talk about "Western democracy", because they're just consistent and sincere enough to give it the dangerous illusion of substance.

 

[Lexicus]

What's more worrying to me is when liberals talk about "Western democracy", because they're just consistent and sincere enough to give it the dangerous illusion of substance.

Oh, we're in agreement here. It's not lost on me that it's been liberals in charge of the imperial apparatus for, what, more than a hundred years now? Compared with liberal centrists, the alt-right are pathetic amateur children when it comes to inflicting violence on the non-western world.

 

[JollyRoger]

Islam is simply incompatible with western/christian civilization.
The right thing is for both to stay where they are and trade goods in peace. Muslims live in muslim land, Christians in Christian land. Anyone who tries to cross the borders with dubious/hostile intent gets blow out of the ground as they should.

There's no reason for us to live in their land, and no reason for them to live in ours.

I agree - put the Muslims in Siberia and the Christians in Antarctica.

 

[Agent327]

Now now, that's unfair. The Christians have, willy nilly, become very valued members of our modern societies. And the Muslims are well under way of becoming the exact same. In fact, they seem to have less trouble with that than the erstwhile Christians, who still cling to their Christian parties where appropriate.