here is the link, its locked by the way beware of the quasi-fascists that are the western europeans
edit: its really easy to attract the islamophobes in this chat
I don't think they're protesting anything. I think they're trying to provoke confrontation with all muslims because they're racist and cruel and view themselves as being victimized by all muslims instead of just the extremist killers.
except shitting on Christians doesn't hurt them because they aren't oppressed by society.
I don't want to pretend like racism is only something that happens in the states, but because it is reddit we're talking about, I do wonder how much of the subscribers are actually Europeans, and now much are American fascists with marble statue fetishes.
Have you met Europeans though? Just mention Roma people anywhere on reddit and time how long it takes for Europeans to leap out from hiding and tell you how their uncle's watch was stolen in Budapest in 1986.
Oh, yeah, I know.
But I remember that sub kinda being, maybe not overtaken, so much as infested, years back, by American racists who think they're European because their great great great grandfolks came from Holland or wherever.
Well hating Muslims is all the rage now, hating Roma has taken a back seat to that.
Though the whole Roma issue is very complex because there is indeed tons of crime (mostly petty crime and drugs) coming out of these communities and they are extremely marginalised. Their way of life means that they are almost impossible to integrate. That shouldn't be a serious issue, since we can just agree to live different. But it makes helping them very hard sometimes. My friend worked at a hospital here, there were lots of Roma children ending up there with various infections, and almost none of them had done any vaccines at all, so doctors gave them all the important vaccines they could for as long as they would stay in the hospital because chances were they were never going to see them again. So yeah, it is a really bad situation and it got worse after the cops dumped all sorts of drugs in their communities during the 90s. I know in other countries things are better but it's just a really tough problem even without all the insane racism against them.
Roma don't integrate because every time they stop moving the Europeans all try to kill them. They all remember how Europe fed them to the Nazis during the holocaust. Why would they integrate with people who have been trying to exterminate them for hundreds of years and still kidnap their children, rape their women, and are right now trying put roma in camps, again.
Also, somewhere over 50% of European Roma are settled and integrated but Europeans don't seem to know that, probably because Roma don't say it too loudly because they know if it became generally known they'd be hunted down and pogromed.
O.o
What you are saying depends on the country. The situation of Roma varies widely according to the specific country. It is a lot more complex than that. There is countries where most have integrated (not now, but it was a process of hundreds of years). Then there is others where almost none have. That they are integrating and people just don't know is also a misleading picture, because, well, people in most European countries are extremely good at telling the descent of someone just by looking at or speaking to them. I guess homogeneity does that to you. It is extremely unlikely that someone would not figure out someone is romani. It's just that 1) settled doesn't mean integrated, there are many communities which are settled but not at all integrated, and 2) it's just not the case for the vast majority in many countries.
The thing is, their traditional way of life is just... Not compatible with the modern way of life in European countries, so settling and integrating is a very, very long and gradual process. And as I said, settling doesn't mean integrating. Integrating is a longer process.
You are 100% right though that part of why they refuse to settle is persecution and social exclusion. And it is absolutely fucked that their genocide wasn't really recognised because "eh, we were racist to them anyways lol". But it is not as simple as "if people just stopped persecuting them they would integrate", because even where tat does happen to some extent, they aren't integrating, and they won't do so for many more years. But maybe they don't have to integrate and it is the wrong way to tackle the issue. So the question becomes, how can there be communication between them and the rest of the population, how can their living standards be up to par, without them necessarily integrating? And that's a hard question. And the way mafias as well as police basically filled their communities with drugs and used them as pawns for drug trade certainly didn't help. There was a sharp before and after felt by many communities with a significant romani population. Though that didn't happen in every country, and where it did, it didn't happen simultaneously. The whole situation is really fucked and there really isn't something I can say "ok, if only we did that, things would get better". The only thing I know for sure is that we need to fight the people trying to take away their rights.
I can't speak about reddit, i mostly avoid it these days, but the fash are really crawling out of the woodwork in Europe rn. I see lots and lots of comments about how we should stop differentiating between Islam in general and violent extremism, and how we need more drastic solutions and should stop being so pc. They're very short of openly advocating for genocide, or for starting another war.
This is in Germany, btw. Where chuds used to have a raging hate boner for Macron, and where nazis still think that you should only drive to France in a tank. Now the same nazis post "vive la France, i stand with Macron" unironically.
europe is also incredible racist fam, france especially is hella racist
i'm not fine with this. I'm a former Muslim living in a Muslim country, i'm absolutely not okay with drawing a cartoon being a death flag. And i'm not fine with leftists allowing the right to take over this "conversation" like this. I'm not okay with normalizing the respect of stupid religious rules by force over non-muslims.
I get you sympathize with French Muslims because in that specific context it's punching down but people in Muslim countries have been assaulted, jailed or killed for less. This is not about drawing Mohamed per se, Shia Muslims do it and have done it for 1400 years, it's about criticizing him . showing him in an unflattering light.
That's what they're angry about. You literally can't talk leftism here without tip-toeing around Mohamed's legacy. Feminism? property rights? religious and sexual minorities? Once they invoke the religion card you have 70% of people against you.
the better approach in my view is that leftists talk about this, instead of unfairly bashing outraged people and pushing them into the right wing. You can both understand extremism is born out of material conditions, that Muslims are currently france's scapegoat for it's economic troube and believe religious criticism is a right.
I'm gonna start by saying that I have never drawn Mohammed, and never have any intention of doing so, and things like the OP are pointlessly upsetting people for no reason.
I will also mention that I was raised in a non-religious household where the only rule that was ever really give to me was "anything is okay to do as long is it doesn't hurt others".
That said, I also do not like the idea of letting a religion impose its will on non-believers simply because it's "marginalised" is kind of scary and would not lead us down a good road.
I get where it's coming from, and the government itself should certainly not be partaking in the antagonism, but come on. You should not be fucking killed for doing anything like this and some people here seem to take a strange amount of glee from this event.
Yeah my only issue with this whole saga is the French government's emotionally manipulative spin to this. A government should never take part in antagonising a minority at the best of times, let alone use it as a lightning rod for social and economic dysfunction. I guess a smart politician never lets a good crisis go to waste.
People who are used to making fun of religion aren't wrong to feel outrage that someone got killed gruesomely over it. We're not Muslim, we shouldn't have to observe Islamic rules.
I just need to reiterate that any leftist who takes it seriously would be delusional to think they won't have to face Mohamed's legacy at some point. Which necessitates criticising him, and people will be angry and the Muslim right wing fascists bank on it. But it has to happen regardless.
nobody here is saying that we can't criticize islam. we are upset that people are targeting an oppressed group because one of them murdered someone. We don't do this when christian commit hate crimes.
I would never blame a European for not caring what happens in Malaysia. People have limited time and energy to care. And obviously the threat close home matters most.
Hell I don't care what happens in the US or EU unless it possibly concerns Arabs and I don't expect foreigners to follow our local news. That's not a sign of hypocrisy.
On principle alone drawing Mohamed isn't wrong and no one should have to observe religious teachings they don't believe in.
it really just comes down to bullying a minority population who doesnt have much in the way of political power here.
I don't even know where to start with this take. Calling drawing some cartoon "bullying" is extremely over dramatic. Not a racist cartoon, not a pro-imperialism or violence one, but a cartoon of a religious figure known for pedophilia and violence. No other group would consider religious satire bullying like this.
Ultimately there's nothing immoral without showing derision towards religion, even a minority one.
Asfor political power, where i'm standing all the way back in Tunisia, we're rarely capable of directly criticizing religion or mocking it the way it's possible in the West. But i would still want the Arab world to be exposed to those ideas, it breaks the taboo around them, and normalising that makes it easier to talk about later here. So it's crucial for these topics to be handled where there is space for it but absolutely tragic that the left stupidly allows the right to control this topic. Then we end up with people like Sam Harris justifying nuking Iran and torturing Iraqis. 15 years ago no one talked about LGBT people or atheism, hell i hadn't heard of the mere concepts until my late teens, didn't know it's a thing that exists. It noticably shifted the overton window.
It just feeds all the people looking for a fight and leaves a trail of collateral damage for really no reason.
If the fight started because a random person did a thing that's perfectly moral, is that person the one at wrong?
beware of the quasi-fascists that are the western europeans
This is quasi-fascists that are the eastern europeans erasure.
Imagine being 2000s atheist and actually sticking with the dawkins crowd as they devolved into open islamophobia. like, holy shit, religion is bad we get it stfu.
What i find amusing and illustrative in this argument is replacing "draw Muhammad" with "saying the n-word" and it being the same fucking argument.
ok look i literally do not give a fuck what is offensive to your religion,
drawing a picture of some guysaying the n-word is not immoral and anyone who suggests that it is can eat my entire assBasically we've got a lot of americans on this site who rightfully feel guilt at kicking disadvantaged people in their own country, but fuck off about caring about the disadvantaged people in other white imperialist countries, they can suck my dick if they don't like it.
lol so if the US did what France just did and projected the n-word on a bunch of government buildings, you think there would be no violence as a result? Come on.
I don’t think it should even be necessary to say this but I will, I am not referring to Islam but specifically to the branches usually termed “fundamentalist”
You're offending all of them with this shit, you fucking idiot. Not to mention you're making the case that much easier for a fundamentalist recruiting someone tramatized by France's own fucking foreign policy. Just point to your local post office or whatever and the argument that the west despises and wants to destroy Islam is made for the the extremists by France's own stupid fucking policy of "freedom via bigotry".
We're on the same page with beheadings and all that, obviously that's not a justified reaction in any circumstance. But France tried putting that fire out with lighter fluid and are acting shocked that more violence has followed. Utter cretins.
How the hell is satirising a highly questionable religious figure the same as the n-word now? We fans of religious authority now?
If you wish to undermine religious authority that means reducing the number of religious adherents.
These divisive tactics with insults, misrepresentations, and minority oppression are not effective towards those ends.Islamophobia is playing into our enemies hands; they rule via divide and conquer.
As leftists what we should aim for is mutual understanding and cooperation.We want religious (and non-religious) people to become more accepting, reasonable, and less reactionary.
Insults only put people into a defensive position. And this only empowers religious authorities.When people publicly insult Mohamed, where do Muslims turn to for support and solidarity?
You have to be more pragmatic about this. There is no slippery slope when your position is rooted in utilitarian concerns.
If freedom of expression were meaningfully at risk then we could simply pivot our tactics.
Those who insult Islam have done nothing wrong; but those insulting Islam to hurt and marginalize Muslims within society are no better than any other bigot.Terrorist attacks in response to such expression is already systematically opposed, so what more do you want?
Mosques and Muslim communities are already under surveillance throughout Europe.Freedom of expression does not mean we have to celebrate every time somebody says something that offends others.
If anything, freedom expression used in this way and on such a scale, causing violence and social unrest, is what puts freedom of expression seriously at risk.If I thought that via Mohamed cartoons within three years we would have millions more ex-Muslims; then absolutely publish away.
But this same shit has been going on for over a decade and I don't think it's working.He's a religious figure and the guy's been dead for 1400 . How can anyone be possibly bigoted against that?
I'm tired of this shit. Comparing a racial slur with mild religious criticism or even pointless mockery is an extremely dumb take. Especially in a context where someone got beheaded over it
islam and race are intertwined in the west though. Non muslim arabs are considered Muslims by the general population if they don't say otherwise. so directly antagonizing muslims is racist.
Lol the mod is Greek and he sounds exactly like every Greek "centrist" ever, including lies about the "lawlessness" in universities and cringelord celebratory posts about every national celebration, except 17 November of course, and shitting on feminism.
Amazing how they can ignore at least one of the messages of one of these very important cartoons.
Ugh. Can’t believe what an idiot I was about this.
So do you or do you not condemn the beheadings? Or did those people have it coming?
Thank you! So nice to get a sincere compliment in these hostile times :)
Nobody’s defending the actions of the terrorists.
Lmao get the fuck out of town you dirty :LIB:
ok look i literally do not give a fuck what is offensive to your religion, drawing a picture of some guy is not immoral and anyone who suggests that it is can eat my entire ass
i dont care if you're religious, but that apathy ends the second you start asking me to follow your dumb fucking religion's dumb fucking rules. fuck off
looks like asking to not draw Muhammad is to much for cringe zoners like you
so if a japanese asks you to take of your shoes when entering his home, are you gonna call him an asshole too, to you basic decency is opression, and you want anyone from the global southto call you a comrade, radlib
The difference is that if you enter a Japanese person's house in shoes, it won't result in a random dude getting his fucking head cut off lol.
Here's what I don't understand, if someone says that something is offensive in their religion I'm obviously going to respect that because I'm not an asshole. But if they say that something is a crime in their religion and the punishment is getting beheaded then I'm super not cool with that. They are imposing on me the rules of their religion, which I'm not a part of.
It's the same way with Christianity and abortion or homosexuality. Everyone agrees that it's not cool that Christians are imposing their morality on the rest of the world, why is it different with Islam? That's an honest question, correct me if I'm being a lib.
Being criticized over deliberately antagonizing people for their religious beliefs, especially if those people have been oppressed by the dominant culture, is not the same thing as being forced to follow a religion. It's not a hard difference to understand. And your comment seems to assume that Muslim people as a whole endorse the beheadings and are using them to impose Islam on other people. Which is a dangerous assumption to make.
Which is a dangerous assumption to make.
It's not a dangerous assumption; it's wrong and Islamophobic.
What does taking your shoes off when entering someone's home has to do with their race? Why would you keep your shoes on, unless specifically asked in the first place?
because its a respect thing (japanese tradition) just like not drawing muhammad is for muslims
Uhm, but you wouldnt take your shoes off when going to say a Germans friend place? I've never heard of this being a Japanese tradition specifically, thought everybody does that.
Idk about the whole Mohammed thing. You're free to draw whatever you want, but showing these drawings to your Muslim friends is when it crosses the line into assholery. Just line showing pictures of your rare steak to your vegan friends is kinda shitty, even though in private you might love steak...
idk about germany but you dont take out your shoes in latin america when entering a home, but if a japanese asked me to i would do it ,just like if a muslim asked me to not draw muhammad.
Ok. In Europe (both East and West) taking your shoes off is also pretty universal, that's why I got confused by the comparison. But it still kinda holds.
its a traditions you dense idiot, stop being such a western chauvinist and accept not everyone country is a parasitic imperialist country based in western supremacy
literally what the fuck are you talking about you fucking fool
"take off your shoes or stay out of my house" completely valid. the reason is cleanliness. theres nothing wrong with that. similarly, "dont draw muhammad in my house or go away" thats fine too
"dont draw muhammad in your own house" is fucking absurd and it's disgusting that you support it. its like a christian telling you not to have gay sex in your house because it's offensive to their religion
fuck all the way off, your religion does not have power over my fucking life
Why would you ever draw Muhammad? About the only reason anyone ever does is in an attempt to deeply insult an enormous number of people. That kind of "fuck you I do what I want" mentality doesn't garner much sympathy from me. Having a reasonable amount of respect for your fellow human beings (i.e., not doing something you would never otherwise do specifically to piss them off) is something we need more of.
Yeah, you're free to yell the N-word at the top of your lungs in public. Yeah, if a black person decides to beat you to death for it they're in the wrong, too. But my sympathy for you in that situation is limited because maybe you shouldn't be an absolute piece of shit just because you technically can.
Why would you ever draw Muhammad?
i have never had any desire to do so and i probably never will, but it is not immoral to do so and i have every right if i did want to
i have every right if i did want to
Yes, that's exactly the "fuck you I do what I want" mentality I was criticizing. That makes you a massive piece of shit, even if you're technically free to do it.
You shouldn't be a massive piece of shit, and you certainly aren't accomplishing anything if you choose to be one. You should be a decent human being.
ok, imagine for a second that i tell you that, according to my religion, it is wrong to wear red on tuesdays. wearing red on tuesdays is a completely benign act im sure we can both agree, there is nothing wrong with doing so. but ill be offended if you do it.
are you an asshole for deciding to wear red on tuesday? no. of fucking course not. you're also not racist, or a lib, or a chud, or a reactionary, or any of the shit im being called in these comments.
How common is wearing red? How common is drawing a picture of Muhammad?
The reasonableness of the request is in large part determined by how burdensome it is to fulfill.
The teacher who was beheaded did not draw the prophet. The elderly woman and man who were beheaded in the church in Nice did not draw the prophet.
Note that a few comments up I've already said killing someone over this is wrong. No one is arguing that people should get the death penalty for drawing Muhammad. The argument is that you're a huge asshole if you do, because there's no reason to do it besides pissing people off.
its not about whether the request is reasonable, its about whether you're an asshole or racist or whatever for refusing. and it is very very easy for you to never wear red again in your life, so surely just not wearing red for one day of the week is not that unreasonable?
if not wearing red on tuesdays were a muslim tradition, you absolutely would be calling me out the exact same way for saying i dont intend to follow that tradition
But I wear red plenty now, so it would at least be somewhat of a burden to remember not to wear red on Tuesdays. It's not a burden at all to not draw Muhammed because I never draw him anyway.
It's the going out of one's way to be as offensive as possible that makes this asshole behavior. No one's ordinary routine is being disrupted, no one's being even slightly inconvenienced.
What if you never wear red but, upon being told you're racist if you wear red on tuesdays, you decide to start wearing red on tuesdays? Does this circularly make you racist?
People don't like being told not to do harmless things because of other people's religious or personal beliefs and will often do those things as a result of being told not to do them because, again, they are harmless things that should not be stigmatized. Drawing pictures of any human who has ever lived or will ever live is a harmless activity which should not get you called racist or an asshole. It doesn't matter if this is just one guy and you could draw any of the other guys who have ever lived, there is no reason not to draw him.
What if you never wear red but, upon being told you’re racist if you wear red on tuesdays, you decide to start wearing red on tuesdays? Does this circularly make you racist?
If I never did something -- let's call it drawing a picture of Muhammad -- but I started doing it specifically to piss off a group of people my country has demonized and killed by the millions, yes, I would be an enormous piece of shit.
How have Chechens been demonized and killed by France? A country explicitly supporting them and their most reactionary elements in their struggles against Russia.
You're intentionally omitting the religious aspect here, which is the whole point.
ok, so say someone wears red on a tuesday and i fucking brutally murder them for it
its their fault, right?
No, and I already gave you this scenario and this answer in this same thread. You're just being argumentative at this point.
Log the fuck off for a bit
The going out of your way argument is good in principle but we're not talking here about a dude just drawing pictures of Muhammad and running around shoving it into random people's faces, are we? It was a teacher, showing the cartoons (that he himself didn't draw) from a well known (even if in very bad taste) magazine in his ethics class as part of a discourse on religious tolerance, censorship, personal freedom. We don't even fucking know his personal stance on the caricatures. On top of that, he got beheaded by a guy from Chechnya, a republic that has never in its history been subject to French colonialism. A republic that has social mores and is ruled in pretty much the same way as Salafist Saudi Arabia. So no, this here is not the hill leftists should die defending because it has zero relevance to the attitudes of the overwhelming majority of Muslims.
No one is arguing that killing someone over this is OK.
The "it's for class" reasoning doesn't hold much water either. We learn about all sorts of things we shouldn't do without needing to see an example of them, and it's not as if a picture of a person is such a difficult concept to grasp that it requires examples.
It holds all the water because context matters. I also don't know what to tell you if you think the purpose of such a class is "to show what a historical figure looks like". Tell me though, would you also ban showing historical photos of banners with the swastika in a history lesson about Nazis because displaying it would hurt the sensibilities of Jewish pupils present and one could describe a swastika by saying it's a black cross with perpendicular lines at each end? Would you ban the virulently racist attitudes, expletives and slave beatings in a film about slavery? This shit comes too close for comfort to lib performative idpol with its deliberate dismissal of context.
no one has ever said "don't draw Muhammad in your own house"??? where the hell are you getting this from. nobody is asking you to not draw Muhammad in private, that's absurd and irrelevant to the question. this whole discourse is about western reactionaries intentionally enflaming the situation by drawing Muhammad outwardly, usually in racist big-nosed depictions i might add.
There are plenty of people who eventually found their way to leftism, but took a detour through mid-2000s atheism. Mid-2000s atheism did rip on other religions occasionally, but of course Islam was the main target as the War on Terror was still relatively popular.
Every chud is a crank in the same way, every leftist is still a :LIB: in at least one way that's unique
FORCING THEIR RULES down people’s throats
*Bourgeois rules, *the proletariat's throat (uwu)
hardly ever see such takes in threads even about far-right Christian people
the evangelical death cult is old news, not much to talk about
I don't know under what rock you've been living if you are new to the massive leftist vitriol against fundamentalist Christians, against fundamentalist Hindus, against the Buddhist monstrous slave state in Tibet pre PRC, against Zionism. Just because it's not ok to just denigrate and pick vicious fights with religious folks who keep their religion to themselves does not in any way justify lionising religious bigots who would kill you first thing for being an "apostate".
lionising religious bigots who would kill you first thing for being an “apostate”.
Zero people in this thread are doing that.
(but not JUST this certain religion ofc!!! even tho its the only one i’m constantly criticizing!!!)
i literally criticized christians for the same shit 2 comments up you dumbfuck piece of shit
i live in alabama, i have a seething hatred for christians and have never knowingly interacted with a muslim. why the fuck are you accusing me of this bullshit?
funny how im "islamophobic" for rejecting religious rule of literally the entire world's population, but not "christophobic" for the same thing
Outright Nazis are also a minority, should the left also protect their honour and their sacred screeds from the dominant imperialist neo-liberals?
are you seriously unironically equating persecuted religious minorities and nazis, jesus fucking christ
jesus fucking christ
Don't use the lord's name in vain, we might have Christians from countries with persecuted Christian minorities browsing this site.
I equate standing up for minorities explicitly pushing a violently reactionary agenda with idiotism. Wahabists are such a minority.
“standing up against islamophobia is the same thing as defending nazis” is a super smart leftist thing to say.
So anti-wahabism is anti-islamophobia now? You know the sect that would gladly massacre all other Muslims if given the chance. Reactionary minorities are reactionary. No passaran.
this whole discourse is about western reactionaries intentionally enflaming the situation by drawing Muhammad outwardly
a muslim's right to tell a person what they can and can not draw based on religious rules end at their own doorstep. i dont care if they're drawing muhammad and then printing it on flags and flying those flags on every street corner in the entire world, it literally does not matter and anyone who gets upset at them for it is responsible for their own feelings, because no one has any obligation to respect rules specific to their religion
so once again, "drawing Muhammad in your own home" is not the question at hand here, you accept this. now you need to accept that nobody gives a shit about questioning the "morality" of drawing Muhammad in a vacuum just as no leftist with half a brain thinks the literal letter structure of the n-word is morally evil on its own. we're talking about cultural contexts. and just as it's morally wrong to go out of your way to be racist towards black people, it's morally wrong to go out of your way to be racist towards Muslims. and it takes a bizarre amount of effort in this context as well, i mean you are arguing for the right for people to make elaborate art just to be racist.
there is literally nothing racist about drawing muhammad as a statement that you dont respect religious guidelines, just in the same way there's nothing racist about waving a pride flag in a christian's face. when people try to impose their religious rules on you and you decide to go out of your way to disrespect those rules, that isnt fucking racist.
these people the OP is talking about are almost certainly racist, yes, but it is not racist to draw muhammad
muslims are a race, and its racist to draw muhammad now, read the room my friend. this is the way of things. stop trying to conflate everything under the western conception of "religion" as if you can approach them all in the exact same way, you imperialist fuck. come to each one humbly with your head bowed, and attempt to learn something new about a different culture, for once in your fucking life.
muslims are a race, and its racist to draw muhammad now
what the fuck is wrong with you lmao this is absurd
race is a social construct and not a biological one, and if you spend 5 seconds looking at the Western discourse you will see that Muslims have undergone racialization. how have you missed this?
ok, if they're a race then they don't have religious rules i need to respect because races are something you are born into and not sets of beliefs that you follow and impose on others
sure, if that's the tack you want to go on. now that we've established islam has been racialized, and that it's extremely obvious that plastering drawings of Muhammad on the walls has been weaponized as form of racial oppression (again take 5 seconds to look at the discourse), can we agree it's fucking racist to do it? and there's precedence of course - culture is a fickle thing and anything can be turned into a slur with enough effort by racists, and we're not even talking about a word, we're talking about elaborately drawing something lmao.
sure, if that’s the tack you want to go on. now that we’ve established islam has been racialized, and that it’s extremely obvious that plastering drawings of Muhammad on the walls has been weaponized as form of racial oppression
why is it racial oppression to draw pictures of some guy? it's against muslims religious beliefs, but we're not talking about a religion here, we're talking about a race.
because racists have turned it into racial oppression? i just said culture is a fickle thing and this is how racial slurs and racial oppression develops, just look at blackface.
this is how racial slurs and racial oppression develops, just look at blackface.
Liberals literally have history backwards. It was the historic material conditions of black exploitation which generated the superstructure of anti-black culture in order to rationalize the existing state of affairs.
blackface is mockery of a specific race's features. drawing muhammad is mockery of a specific religion's rules. how is there any similarity?
i don't know how many times i have to keep saying this - racial oppression develops culturally, meaning there could be no logic to it but it becomes racist anyway due to the usage by racists for that purpose. for example, a lot of slurs have literally no etymological meaning, such as the "G" word used against Asians. you are trying to make racism seem logical, when it isn't and never has been.
i don’t know how many times i have to keep saying this
maybe because it's totally wrong?
racial oppression develops culturally,
please read Marx
there could be no logic to it but it becomes racist anyway due to the usage by racists for that purpose
*bourgeois racists use this 100% logical ideology for the purpose of maintaining exploitative worker relations.
so when and how am i allowed to criticize those who wish to impose their religious rules on me?
it's just a word guys stop imposing your rules on me i can say it whenever i want
no, but being black could be described as a "din" interestingly enough, which Islam describes itself as, as the English word "religion" and its connotations did not exist in classical Arabic. Would you like to learn things from an Islamic perspective, considering you "have never knowingly interacted with a muslim"?
ok so how do i state my disinterest in following their religious rules without being racist?
No one asks that you follow ramadan don't work on fridays or quit eating pork. You can even draw mohammed in your own home. But drawing muhammad in our society with it's context has been made into a racist attack on Muslims. I don't know if dogwhistle is the right term, but it is similar, i think.
It's baffling how stupid liberals like you don't realize that by being so afraid of even talking about or being associated with some, basically neutral thing, be it a meme, a subculture, scene or social space online that the right has even so much as vaguely tried to associate itself with, they are literally ceding ground and surrendering said thing to the right. The right barely has to do any effort to take over something it seems, just make the vaguest gesture that said thing is their turf and culture war obsessed lefties immediately hand it over to them because they are obsessed with appearing pure and free of anything even vaguely "problematic".
You are a fucking idiot and in a perfect world you would be born without hands so that no one would ever have to read your shitty posts. Inshallah that happens to you one day
make the vaguest gesture that said thing is their turf and culture war obsessed lefties immediately hand it over to them because they are obsessed
This is what happens when you're an idealistic liberal. Marxists know that historical material conditions are the base from which all these superstructure ideologies are formed. If an idea is racist, it's because the material world you live in is racist, like it's the symptom of a deeper disease.
That comment is so absurdly idiotic that I assumed he was trolling at first. But no, somehow he actually believes it.
the statement "religion is reactionary" as if you could conflate everything under the western conception of “religion” is unmaterial and unmarxist, go to bed.
Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. it is the VAPORWAVE of the masses.
It's interesting how civilians murdering each other on the basis of race gets them branded as reactionaries but using the same label on those who murder on the basis of religion is a bit too far-fetched.
It's also interesting how you selectively invoke that quote from Marx while conveniently omitting the wider point, that religion is the "illusory Sun" that "revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself". Which is to say, religion in practice is an organ of bourgeois reaction, used for the exploitation and estupefaction of the working class.
You are an opportunist and a revisionist and wallahi you will one day be punished for your treachery.
The majority of racists don't act out on any violent fantasies they might hold, it still makes them reactionaries. You fucking dolt.
The point is that it doesn't matter whether you say or do anything racist to be a reactionary, you just need to hold racist views. The same applies to religious zealotry.
imagine accusing a middle easterner of orientalism, just take the L and go home
i literally do not give a fuck what is offensive
eat my entire ass
fuck off
Civility at the expense of accomplishing something real is bullshit, but man, you're not going to get very far with very many people if you're just an outright asshole.
Do you understand how traumatic it is to grow up in an environment ruled, socially and legally, by religion? It's fucking horrifying. And then to see people who are supposed to be supporting you calling you racist, a chud, an asshole, etc for daring to suggest that religion shouldn't control the life of a non-religious person? That's terrifying too. I'm lashing out because this is truly a terrible, disgusting thing that people here are thoughtlessly supporting.
religion shouldn’t control the life of a non-religious person?
yes, the evil muslims are preventing you from drawing muhammad which is something that non-religious people normally want to do on a regular basis
Yes, except christian instead. You realize christianity and islam are almost precisely the same fucking thing, right? Muslims believe in jesus for fucks sake. Pretending they are significantly different in any meaningful way aside from that one happened to be largely the victor over recent history is incredibly ignorant.
You realize christianity and islam are almost precisely the same fucking thing, right?
Bit of an oversimplification there
Not really. They believe 99% of the same things, follow 99% of the same rules, and result in 99% of the same outcomes when they dominate society.
The only American colonies that didn't start indian wars did so because of their quaker convictions. I dont think the issue is abrahamic religion so much as what being in power tends to do to a group
So if no one is preventing anyone from drawing caricatures why was showing a caricature in a class explicitly dealing with religious indoctrination punished? By death, no less.
Lmao bro is this how you treat trans comrades as well? it's super easy to respect a muslim's desire to not depict the prophet because it's disrespectful, much like it's easy to use someone's preferred pronouns. imagine respecting people lmao
What kind of consistency is this idea based on? That whenever someone holds someone else in high esteem you have to respect that? So by this logic could Trump supporters call you bigoted for drawing mean pictures of Trump?
There's not hundreds of years of cultural context built up around the idea of artistically depicting Trump, this isn't even remotely a fair example.
It’s really less about the specific concept of drawings, and more so just... maybe respect religions that are minorities. Like will you die if you don’t post something incredibly offensive to an already targeted group?
Being religious precludes you from basic respect
-this clown i guess
no, but i do not respect religious rules and i absolutely never will and should not be expected to.
Listen man I'm not a believer either, i'm not saying you should be following any religious doctrine. I'm just saying there's no material difference between respecting someone's cultural or religious sensibilities. You're alienating religious comrades for what seems to be no reason other than an imagined, arbitrary distinction between religion and any other way of life.
I could use your same logic to say that i should be able to use the n word because i arbitrarily decided that the set of social rules around why i shouldn't don't apply to me, and i shouldn't be expected to follow them.
You kind of are saying that he needs to follow their religious doctrine, though.
The prohibition against artistically depicting Mohammad isn't even in the Qu'ran, for one thing. Even if it were, he still wouldn't be beholden to it. He could draw Mohammed to his heart's content, much like he could commit any other microaggression against any other group of people.
But why? For what purpose would a non-believer do that, knowing full well it would cause a fuss among a people a billion strong, unless that was the point? The only reason you would go out of your way to do this, as many reactionaries have over the last two decades, is to be edgy and offensive on purpose. "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."
Nobody has ever tripped with a pencil in hand and fell on a piece of paper accidentally drawing the Prophet and accidentally posting it online happening to fall on their keyboard to spell "this is my depiction of the prophet Mohammed", it isn't even something you could justifiably say was done in ignorance unless you live under the world's largest rock. It's something done by right wing islamaphobes to purposefully enflame religious tensions, and my dear comrades are dragging me out of my peaceful lurking to justify it. Is it really that hard for leftists to respect people?
i’m not saying you should be following any religious doctrine
you literally are though, you're saying that i should feel bad about people drawing muhammad because muslims think it's wrong to do so
once again, fuck off
Drawing a mean picture of a Muslim is islamophobic. Respect Muslims of course. But raping a child, advocating slavery, etc. This does preclude you from respect and no one else can save you from that.
It is clear that your outlook on Islam and Mohammed isn't based on a wide breadth of knowledge on the subject, which isn't particularly surprising or unique. This is okay though, because I've been noticing that there has been a concerted effort from some Muslim users on this site to try to reach out and inform comrades about misconceptions like what you've mentioned here. I saw a post by u/Saif, moderator of the new c/islam, regarding another user's perception of Aisha ("raping a child") that might clear that up, for instance.
Carrying around a picture of a butchered steer isn't immoral but it would upset some people. Carrying one around and showing it to everyone just because you're upset that people are vegan would be kind of a dick move.
- that is not equivalent for obvious reasons
- veganism is not a fucking religion
Veganism is a set of beliefs and practices based around a shared moral and ideological belief, so yes, it is a religion.
And yes, running around with a picture that you know will upset people for the explicit purpose of upsetting people is exactly the same.
a set of beliefs and practices based around a shared moral and ideological belief, so yes, it is a religion.
>libs trying to argue marxism or science is a religion
So, coming from an anthropology perspective - Lots of things are religions. It's not a big deal. Chicago School economics is a religion. Liberal economics is a religion. Marxism, scientific or not, is a religion. "The Revolution" is an eschatological conflict at the end of history, at once immanent in our lives yet also constantly occupying the horizon of time.
Something being a religion doesn't comment on it's moral qualities or truth value or whatever, it's just a descriptive term. And Veganism, with it's distinctive beliefs, moral code, dietary restrictions, cultural markers, etc etc etc, counts.
killing an animal has a victim, drawing a picture of muhammad has no victim
and veganism isnt a fucking religion, you're a dumb piece of shit
If the downvotes aren’t enough of a hint, chill tf out.
Much like drawing the Prophet, while it doesn’t physically harm anyone, it’s disrespectful and counterproductive.
You sound like one of those nerds who say the n word is "just a word"
drawing a picture of some guy is not immoral
"I'm not going to worship that golden calf, I'm a rational and logical!" (ten minutes later) "GOLDEN CALF TAKE MY FIRST BORN!!!!"
But fuck Christianity, Scientology, and sometimes Judaism, right? But bend the knee for one of the two most dominant theologies because Brown people. (Oh yeah, this is when we conveniently call Latinos white for their Catholic influence.) You really think Islam's ascendance pooped out pink rainbows and gold doubloons on the other side?
If your analysis of religion ends at ‘religion bad’, you need to read more about Christian anarchism, Catholic Workers, and liberation theology, especially its role in Latin America.
Wahhabism is obviously a garbage tier ideology, but if your takeaway from that is to try to offend everyone from the broader religion, you’ve taken a wrong turn somewhere, at both a moral and a strategic level.
this is when we conveniently call Latinos white for their Catholic influence
when you don't know about Spain's genocidal settler colonialism
...Anyone who defends China's treatment of Uighers but bitches about cartoons is a worthless lib.
Anyone who regurgitates American state department talking points is a lib^2
Religion is the opiate of the masses. Oh also we have to respect antiblasphemy edicts, peace be upn someone I don't believe in.
Funny how people always quote that part, and not the part about religion being the sigh of the oppressed or the sense of a senseless world
What, do you want the masses to suffer this shitty existence without painkillers? Sadist.
China is taking direct and effective anti-terrorism operations that focus on education; France is defending the rights of bigots to be bigots. The Xinjiang Schooling Programs have a great likelihood to completely or almost completely eliminate terrorism in Xinjiang after only a few years; to portray both as violent acts against Muslims ignores the fact that France seeks only to exclude, alienate, and offend while China seeks to educate and integrate - which is why almost every single Muslim country on earth, even erstwhile U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia - are backing the Chinese and opposing the French.
because china gives them money and will enrich them post oil through the new silk road. Don't be a fool, fuck muhammed uphold mao zedong thought
which is why almost every single Muslim country on earth, even erstwhile U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia - are backing the Chinese and opposing the French.
Hmmm does the U.S. give anyone money?
