Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 08-25-2010, 12:40 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
I don't think that this sort of thing is covered by Constitutional guarantees.
It's not. The 1st amendment doesn't give immunity for the breaking of a neutral criminal law, which is what it would be.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 08-25-2010, 12:47 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Illiberal impulses from the left regarding Islam?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
To think that this represents a refusal to apply human rights and liberal values to Muslims is absurd.
Right, and it's odd that the argument seems to be merely the blanket claim, without evidence. Whenever anyone actually addresses the claim or suggests that the actual arguments made be addressed, they are ignored.

It's simpler that way, I suppose.

I too am for human rights and against their violation and I'm standing up for them. How? Well I said so! I'm so brave I'm willing to come out against honor killing and FGM! When have you stopped being for honor killing and FGM? It reminds me of Tom Lehrer's Folk Song Army: "We all hate poverty, war, and injustice/Unlike the rest of you squares." Don't want to talk about actual difficulties with actual policies, change the issue to whether or not you hate honor killing.

Last edited by stephanie; 08-25-2010 at 12:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:35 PM
Lyle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Illiberal impulses from the left regarding Islam?

I'm on your side of this issue Jon. If you're going to scream at Christians, you better fucking be screaming at Muslims.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 08-26-2010, 01:28 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whatfur View Post
My, my, Zeke. Are you threatening me, tough guy? You gonna go all Pulp Fiction on me? Don't let the veins in your neck burst that cute little puka shell necklace there hardass. Does your mommy know you use those words?
Good lord, it was supposed to be a joke. Also, is there a way to flag this for Brenda? Can I get it framed next to my oh-so-inflammatory "lying, irrational or stupid" line?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whatfur View Post
In any case, You seemed to have moved the goal line here. "American Liberal" now, eh?

Was this guy a liberal?. Such things are not going to be admitted in Amercia until well until someone runs over their daughter with a jeep. So I guess it is the question that is idiotic.
I wanted to prevent you from going full Sophist and listing, say, Ahmadinejad or the Times Square (failed) bomber as an example of multiculturalism leading to tolerance of human rights abuses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whatfur View Post
Do you think there are any American Liberals who are perfectly happy with packing up and leaving Afghanistan in the hands of the Taliban? Do you think the majority of the Taliban believe that honor killings are ummm honorable?
Yes, because not wanting to continue the Afghan War means we support honor killings and the disfigurement of women, obviously. One question, though. You seem to be suggesting that these things are so abominable that anyone not advocating open-ended wars to (maybe) stamp them out is actually somehow supporting these practices.

This brings a comparison to my mind. You think Abortion is wrong, right? The murder of a human person and all that, correct? And yet you aren't attempting to violently overthrow the US government that allows it to happen are you? So this means you tacitly support abortion, correct?
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 08-26-2010, 07:32 AM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
This brings a comparison to my mind. You think Abortion is wrong, right? The murder of a human person and all that, correct? And yet you aren't attempting to violently overthrow the US government that allows it to happen are you? So this means you tacitly support abortion, correct?
Jesus, Zeke, don't encourage him. I don't think it'd take much.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 08-26-2010, 07:48 AM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
I don't think ....
Obviously.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 08-26-2010, 08:12 AM
ledocs ledocs is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: France, Earth
Posts: 1,165
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Had to turn it off. Too boring.
__________________
ledocs
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 08-26-2010, 09:00 PM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
...idiot ...motherf*****....
I see I made the dungeon title instead of you. I will take it as an honor and proof that the admins here are a bunch of lefty hacks. Thanks Brenda!

Last edited by Whatfur; 08-26-2010 at 09:15 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 08-26-2010, 10:43 PM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Yep, lets leave things in their hands.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 08-27-2010, 06:08 AM
MikeDrew MikeDrew is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 110
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eli Lake View Post
I am baffled by Always Cynical's post. I explicitly say I don't care if the mosque is built, that I don't challenge the property rights of the Cordoba House project to build the mosque, and that people in free societies don't have a right not to be offended. I also say that those who limit their opposition to expressing that they are offended by the project are not practicing a form of bigotry. If the opposition to the mosque limits their activism to appealing to the organizers to find another location and not the state to block the project, then I see this as nothing more than the give and take a democratic society, and not evidence of a new cultural war on Muslims.
I agree that if it is so limited it is part of democratic give and take, and that it does not then constitute an infringement of their legal rights. But how is this category exclusive of the category of "cultural war"? Surely democratic give and take could amount to cultural war if it is intense and focused enough, couldn't it? We might not like democratic give and take to go that far, but it nevertheless could, couldn't it? It could result in the infringement of legal rights, but it needn't, need it?
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 08-27-2010, 06:25 AM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Canada Free Press facts checks the Associated Press...thats sad.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 08-27-2010, 06:44 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexandrite View Post
Thought 2:
As a contrarian, I'm constantly on the look out for the arguments being left on the table. Think of these as $20 on the sidewalk, but with intelligent thoughts. What Brian Caplan calls Inconvenient Positions, where "there's an ideologically cleaner and more crowd-pleasing rationale for what I think people ought to do." Being a contrarian is about playing these odds.

In the past decade I've found 2 ideas which are very dangerous, which would require a ton of investment to pull off, and if done right, could be a gold mine. They're too dangerous and hard for me, and that's saying a lot.

1: Anthropogenic Global Warming doesn't matter.
The field on this is cluttered, but almost no one who makes this argument is using the right tools for the job.

2: The West is, if not now, in this century will be, at war with Islam.

It's just too dangerous an argument to make if you're not going to do it right. It gets even worse when you consider the possibility you might actually be right, or worse you might be wrong and convince others you're right.

What both of these silly ideas have to do with is that there are plenty of idiots (on the right) who are willing to push on them because they see the gold. They're right there is an under represented position here, but they're using the argument like a monkey wields a gun. They don't care if they are right or wrong about the argument, or what damage they do, or who they trick. They don't even understand the technology behind the argument. It's like magic to them. If it gets what they want right now, go for it.

That said, just because some people are willing to make a bad argument about something doesn't mean it's not true. So let's assume the dangerous hypothetical for a moment.

If the West is at war with Islam, or is doomed to one, how should our society deal with Muslims?

I guess I would like to see just a tiny bit more deference to this possibility. Maybe the bigots are right? It doesn't even seem like the bigots are taking themselves seriously, but you can be right and unserious. I just feel like no one wants to consider the possibility that we're all wrong. Not to get all pascal wagery, but shouldn't we take some precaution against this event? I'm not saying banning Mosques is the answer, but what actions are we taking to prevent this possibility, and what protections do we have in case such a conflict does happen?

I guess I'm trying to say, Why doesn't anyone take seriously the possibility that Osama Bin Laden is correct and there is a larger, maybe even holy, struggle happening between civilizations? How would we disprove this idea? If it's true, what should we be doing that we're not?[removed Alexandrite's bolded so mine would be clear]
So, is it a silly idea, or not? As it stands now, Western influence has ratcheted up the Muslim interpretation of the Koran. At the turn of the last century, suicide bombing would have been unthinkable, as suicide is banned in the Koran, but now the Koran is interpreted, by some, in such a way as to condone it. Now that the West has opened the door to such interpretations, I don't know if it can ever be permanently quelled. One way to find out would be to militarily exit all Islamic countries, while suppressing, by any and all means, the Islamafication of western countries. That is, a complete crackdown on burqas, FGM, Koran on the top shelf of the library, segregated gym classes, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 08-28-2010, 01:11 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

I'm not positive I have the context of these quotes right, as I'm responding to a response to Alexandrite, so feel free to clarify:

Alexandrite:

Quote:
I guess I would like to see just a tiny bit more deference to this possibility [that the West is at or is doomed to war with Islam]. Maybe the bigots are right? It doesn't even seem like the bigots are taking themselves seriously, but you can be right and unserious. I just feel like no one wants to consider the possibility that we're all wrong. Not to get all pascal wagery, but shouldn't we take some precaution against this event? I'm not saying banning Mosques is the answer, but what actions are we taking to prevent this possibility, and what protections do we have in case such a conflict does happen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by look View Post
So, is it a silly idea, or not? As it stands now, Western influence has ratcheted up the Muslim interpretation of the Koran. At the turn of the last century, suicide bombing would have been unthinkable, as suicide is banned in the Koran, but now the Koran is interpreted, by some, in such a way as to condone it. Now that the West has opened the door to such interpretations, I don't know if it can ever be permanently quelled. One way to find out would be to militarily exit all Islamic countries, while suppressing, by any and all means, the Islamafication of western countries. That is, a complete crackdown on burqas, FGM, Koran on the top shelf of the library, segregated gym classes, etc.
First, I don't get this "no one takes seriously the idea" thing. It's the Samuel J. Huntington argument, isn't it. Seems to me it's taken somewhat seriously by some people, if in a more of a Thomas Friedman "McDonald's prevent war" kind of way that's been increasingly discredited even to those who originally pushed it, which is perhaps why people are feeling that it's not an argument worth addressing.

Personally, though, I think the comments above seem to combine a couple of issues which are separate: (1) is "the West" at war (or doomed to be) with "Islam"; and (2) what would that require/mean. There seems to be an assumption that this current Cordoba Center is related to (1) -- a response that makes sense if you buy (1) such that people dismissing the anti position about the Cordoba Center are seen to not be taking seriously (1).

So, to start, I think it's important to point out that there's no legitimate connection between one's conclusions or concerns about (1) and the Cordoba Center. There's simply no rational argument that I've heard that the building of the Cordoba Center will have any influence on any alleged war between "Islam" and "the West." The whole vague idea that it will weaken the US or be a victory for OBL or so on is simply groundless and idiotic. Same for the idea that it will be a step in the direction of sharia law. Thus, while I'm not accusing either look or Alexandrite of this at all (you both seem reasonable to me from my memory of your posts) bringing up the "what if we are at war with Islam" thing in the context of the discussion of the Cordoba Center (as has been done in the course of the broader discussion of the issue) seems inherently irrelevant and an effort to play on simple anger at Muslims.

I do see why it would come up as a tangent in a bloggingheads thread without such concerns attaching, and thus I'll try to address it, although I think it will take a bit to frame the argument. Mainly because, as indicated in a reply to BornAgainDem elsewhere, I don't think it makes sense to speak of a war between undefined terms (and non-actors) like "the West" and "Islam." The US seeks no war with "Islam," and I don't believe a variety of other countries generally included in the term do either, and they share no common view on how to deal with various other related problems. Thus, what is clearly being asked is more correctly stated: "what if Islam has declared war on 'the West.'" Setting aside the lack of clarity in the latter term, the problem is that Islam is not a person or nation or any unified force. The question is whether some groups who identify as Islamic have declared war on "the West" (and those groups may not agree on who they are at war with or what their goals are).

Defined that way, I'd agree that it's true, but not because there's some possible unknown war/decide to harm what the US (and American liberals) see as our interests that we aren't acknowledging.

So then you get to (2). The vague notion again seems to be that if we acknowledge this possible war that this might affect our answer in some of the discussions we've been having -- i.e., liberal assumptions about the first amendment, etc., aren't valid if (1) turns out to be true. I think this assumption needs to be fleshed out, because it strikes me as clearly wrong. Again, how does the Cordoba Center question change at all? The discussion regarding the other mosques that have been opposed?

In particular, historically oppressing (or seeming to oppress) a religious group doesn't seem to be effective in damping down fervor (and it's a certain type of fervor and fundamentalism that's the issue, not Islam per se), quite the opposite. If I believed we were in danger from the spread of fundamentalist and fervent Islam within the US, I'd say the worst and most dangerous response would be to crack down and try to use state action to oppose it. On the other hand, generally letting alone (other than the continued enforcement of our neutral criminal laws) would most likely mean that people would move toward a more conciliatory form of the religion. (And this seems not even a problem with the types of Islam most common in the US already, which currently show that Islam and the US aren't at war -- why ruin this by determining that because some Islamic groups don't like us we should pick a fight with Islam generally and dismissing the argument that plenty of Muslims accept that there's no inherent conflict between "western values" and Islam?)
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 08-28-2010, 01:27 PM
Lyle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Wait... the West is at fault for aggressive interpretations of the Koran? Is this like the argument black rappers make about the violence of their lyrics... it's the corporations' fault?

The West is responsible for being far out ahead in its modernity, but it's not primarily responsible for the irresponsibility and failures of the Muslim world. At some point, Muslims have to say to themselves, "we suck something awfully bad, and we need to stop blaming others... it's all on us to correct our miserable situation... instead of complaining, lets ask for help, fuck our pride".

Last edited by Lyle; 08-28-2010 at 09:36 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 08-29-2010, 11:54 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanie View Post
I'm not positive I have the context of these quotes right, as I'm responding to a response to Alexandrite, so feel free to clarify:

Alexandrite:





First, I don't get this "no one takes seriously the idea" thing. It's the Samuel J. Huntington argument, isn't it. Seems to me it's taken somewhat seriously by some people, if in a more of a Thomas Friedman "McDonald's prevent war" kind of way that's been increasingly discredited even to those who originally pushed it, which is perhaps why people are feeling that it's not an argument worth addressing.

Personally, though, I think the comments above seem to combine a couple of issues which are separate: (1) is "the West" at war (or doomed to be) with "Islam"; and (2) what would that require/mean. There seems to be an assumption that this current Cordoba Center is related to (1) -- a response that makes sense if you buy (1) such that people dismissing the anti position about the Cordoba Center are seen to not be taking seriously (1).

So, to start, I think it's important to point out that there's no legitimate connection between one's conclusions or concerns about (1) and the Cordoba Center. There's simply no rational argument that I've heard that the building of the Cordoba Center will have any influence on any alleged war between "Islam" and "the West." The whole vague idea that it will weaken the US or be a victory for OBL or so on is simply groundless and idiotic. Same for the idea that it will be a step in the direction of sharia law. Thus, while I'm not accusing either look or Alexandrite of this at all (you both seem reasonable to me from my memory of your posts) bringing up the "what if we are at war with Islam" thing in the context of the discussion of the Cordoba Center (as has been done in the course of the broader discussion of the issue) seems inherently irrelevant and an effort to play on simple anger at Muslims.

I do see why it would come up as a tangent in a bloggingheads thread without such concerns attaching, and thus I'll try to address it, although I think it will take a bit to frame the argument. Mainly because, as indicated in a reply to BornAgainDem elsewhere, I don't think it makes sense to speak of a war between undefined terms (and non-actors) like "the West" and "Islam." The US seeks no war with "Islam," and I don't believe a variety of other countries generally included in the term do either, and they share no common view on how to deal with various other related problems. Thus, what is clearly being asked is more correctly stated: "what if Islam has declared war on 'the West.'" Setting aside the lack of clarity in the latter term, the problem is that Islam is not a person or nation or any unified force. The question is whether some groups who identify as Islamic have declared war on "the West" (and those groups may not agree on who they are at war with or what their goals are).

Defined that way, I'd agree that it's true, but not because there's some possible unknown war/decide to harm what the US (and American liberals) see as our interests that we aren't acknowledging.

So then you get to (2). The vague notion again seems to be that if we acknowledge this possible war that this might affect our answer in some of the discussions we've been having -- i.e., liberal assumptions about the first amendment, etc., aren't valid if (1) turns out to be true. I think this assumption needs to be fleshed out, because it strikes me as clearly wrong. Again, how does the Cordoba Center question change at all? The discussion regarding the other mosques that have been opposed?

In particular, historically oppressing (or seeming to oppress) a religious group doesn't seem to be effective in damping down fervor (and it's a certain type of fervor and fundamentalism that's the issue, not Islam per se), quite the opposite. If I believed we were in danger from the spread of fundamentalist and fervent Islam within the US, I'd say the worst and most dangerous response would be to crack down and try to use state action to oppose it. On the other hand, generally letting alone (other than the continued enforcement of our neutral criminal laws) would most likely mean that people would move toward a more conciliatory form of the religion. (And this seems not even a problem with the types of Islam most common in the US already, which currently show that Islam and the US aren't at war -- why ruin this by determining that because some Islamic groups don't like us we should pick a fight with Islam generally and dismissing the argument that plenty of Muslims accept that there's no inherent conflict between "western values" and Islam?)
Thanks for your thoughtful post, stephanie. My reply to Alexandrite was not related to the mosque's location or suitability.

As I said, I think Western influence over the ME since colonial days has built
into great resentment by Middle Easterners. For example, as I loosely understand it, Iraq agreed to revolt against the Ottoman Empire in order to help the British during WWI...with the understanding that they would be permitted to become an autonomous state/kingdom. This semi-materialized, excepting the usurpation of their oil rights. As time went on these colonized countries became more bitter, building up to events like our interference in 1956 Iran. Below, there are some interesting Wiki articles, and an excerpt from a book review to illustrated what I mean.

As I mentioned, Koran texts that had been more benevolently interpreted in the past have changed to a more expansive reading, which 'permits' suicide bombing. My main point about war with Islam rests on, as you said, different varieties of Islam. The brand that now wants to destroy the Great Satan can be looked at, I think, as a bad computer virus that may possibly spread and become uncontainable, especially if the global economic picture becomes very bleak.

I agree completely with freedom of religion, with, as you say, strict adherence to
our neutral criminal laws, and that repression of religious freedoms will breed
resentment and belligerence. But the rubber will hit the road on those very tough issues that are more of a civil nature, I think, such as, shall Muslim boys be dismissed from class four, or so, times a day to pray. Shall young girls be
excused from certain gym classes due to modesty reasons, shall cousin marriage be permitted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosul_P...Ottoman_Empire

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_I_of_Iraq


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/037...pf_rd_i=507846
Quote:
Howell delicately avoids the ramifications of Bell's actions as the midwife of modern Iraq. We know that Iraq was a mess. Anglo-French policy in the Middle East was a double-cross. In order to divert the Turks from the Dardanelles and secure the oil fields of Iraq, the British encouraged a pan-Arab revolt against the tottering Ottoman empire, engineered by Bell's irrepressible old friend T.E. Lawrence. Bell knew, as he did, that Allied promises of a fully independent Arabia were hollow. The French were set on gaining control of Syria, and everyone wanted to bash the Turks; the British wanted their oil. Bell herself was very fond of Faisal, scion of an aristocratic family in Mecca who grew up to be a brave warrior and went out of his way to court her, and so she found him a kingdom: Iraq, which was strung together out of the most unlikely constituents. The British did their best to run it on the cheap.

As far as no one taking war with Islam seriously, the current mosque brouhaha does seem to mostly entail the lefty loosies and the conservative tighties, with a pretty good sprinkling of line-crossers. But you mentioned 'Clash of Civilizations,' and here are interesting links via TGGP, commenting on a Reza Aslan/Rod Dreher dv, and Huntingon's original thesis, via dieter:

http://entitledtoanopinion.wordpress...lan-is-a-putz/

http://history.club.fatih.edu.tr/103...ull%20text.htm
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 08-29-2010, 11:56 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle View Post
Wait... the West is at fault for aggressive interpretations of the Koran? Is this like the argument black rappers make about the violence of their lyrics... it's the corporations' fault?

The West is responsible for being far out ahead in its modernity, but it's not primarily responsible for the irresponsibility and failures of the Muslim world. At some point, Muslims have to say to themselves, "we suck something awfully bad, and we need to stop blaming others... it's all on us to correct our miserable situation... instead of complaining, lets ask for help, fuck our pride".
Please see my reply to stephanie.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 08-30-2010, 07:38 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by look View Post
My reply to Alexandrite was not related to the mosque's location or suitability.
I hope I was clear enough that I didn't think it was. It was mostly a tangent as to why I think the broader issue shouldn't be tied up in the Cordoba Center discussion (prompted by comments I've seen mainly off bloggingheads).

Based on what you've said, I suspect we have a decent amount of agreement about the history at issue.

Quote:
As I mentioned, Koran texts that had been more benevolently interpreted in the past have changed to a more expansive reading, which 'permits' suicide bombing. My main point about war with Islam rests on, as you said, different varieties of Islam. The brand that now wants to destroy the Great Satan can be looked at, I think, as a bad computer virus that may possibly spread and become uncontainable, especially if the global economic picture becomes very bleak.
We probably have a lot of agreement on this too. I don't go quite as far as Bob Wright, for example, but I definitely think there's truth to his arguments about how religious interpretation varies more based on external factors than something intrinsic in the religion itself. Thus, why would Islam be an exception? Historically, in fact, it seems to fit the pattern well enough.

Quote:
I agree completely with freedom of religion, with, as you say, strict adherence to our neutral criminal laws, and that repression of religious freedoms will breed resentment and belligerence. But the rubber will hit the road on those very tough issues that are more of a civil nature, I think, such as, shall Muslim boys be dismissed from class four, or so, times a day to pray. Shall young girls be excused from certain gym classes due to modesty reasons, shall cousin marriage be permitted?
Yes, there definitely will be issues, as there have been with other religious traditions and observances, although I'm reasonably optimistic about our ability to work these things out.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 08-30-2010, 08:39 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default The Waterworld of white self-pity

Christopher Hitchens, on the Glenn Beck event:
Quote:
... the overall effect was large, vague, moist, and undirected: the Waterworld of white self-pity.

[...]

What does it take to believe that Christianity is an endangered religion in America or that the name of Jesus is insufficiently spoken or appreciated? Who wakes up believing that there is no appreciation for our veterans and our armed forces and that without a noisy speech from Sarah Palin, their sacrifice would be scorned? It's not unfair to say that such grievances are purely and simply imaginary, which in turn leads one to ask what the real ones can be. The clue, surely, is furnished by the remainder of the speeches, which deny racial feeling so monotonously and vehemently as to draw attention.
(h/t bjkeefe)
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 08-30-2010, 08:47 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: The Waterworld of white self-pity

Quote:
What does it take to believe that Christianity is an endangered religion in America or that the name of Jesus is insufficiently spoken or appreciated? Who wakes up believing that there is no appreciation for our veterans and our armed forces and that without a noisy speech from Sarah Palin, their sacrifice would be scorned? It's not unfair to say that such grievances are purely and simply imaginary, which in turn leads one to ask what the real ones can be. The clue, surely, is furnished by the remainder of the speeches, which deny racial feeling so monotonously and vehemently as to draw attention.
Yes, if it weren't already "I have a Dream Day," we could call it National White Power Nostalgia, Resentment and Latent Racism Day.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 08-30-2010, 08:48 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: The Waterworld of white self-pity

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Yes, if it weren't already "I have a Dream Day," we could call it National White Power Nostalgia, Resentment and Latent Racism Day.
Perfect.

They're on the verge of running the country. Brace yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 09-01-2010, 02:58 AM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanie View Post
I hope I was clear enough that I didn't think it was. It was mostly a tangent as to why I think the broader issue shouldn't be tied up in the Cordoba Center discussion (prompted by comments I've seen mainly off bloggingheads).
Yes, I see where you emphasized that you thought the mosque was not related to our subject, but upon re-reading, I caught this
Quote:
or be a victory for OBL or so on is simply groundless and idiotic.
and I have to say that I do think it's a feather in the cap of OBL to have a controversial Muslim establishment built so close to 9/11. But it's still tangential to Greater Islam.
Quote:
Based on what you've said, I suspect we have a decent amount of agreement about the history at issue.
Agreed.
Quote:
We probably have a lot of agreement on this too. I don't go quite as far as Bob Wright, for example, but I definitely think there's truth to his arguments about how religious interpretation varies more based on external factors than something intrinsic in the religion itself. Thus, why would Islam be an exception? Historically, in fact, it seems to fit the pattern well enough. Yes, there definitely will be issues, as there have been with other religious traditions and observances, although I'm reasonably optimistic about our ability to work these things out.
Me, too.

Here's an update I missed from the Entitled to an Opinion blog I linked to:

Quote:
UPDATE: In the comments [at Razib's blog] Razib gives a fantastic explanation for the contingent nature of Arab/Muslim conquests after being asked to expand on simple “no” response. It’s the sort of thing that reminds me why I started visiting there in the first place.
http://js-kit.com/api/static/pop_com...94208407484413
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 09-01-2010, 06:10 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by look View Post
I have to say that I do think it's a feather in the cap of OBL to have a controversial Muslim establishment built so close to 9/11.
I don't agree, and would further point out that I think it's actually the US and Islam as inherent enemies position that furthers his goals and probably makes him happiest, but more significantly I think this is the wrong question.

As a matter of actual fact, does having the Cordoba Center hurt the US? Make us militarily weaker? Force us to do something we would not have chosen under our own system/values? Clearly not -- the people arguing for the CC, after all, are basing the argument on traditional American values, and I don't see how it has any affect on the power of the US or our strength at all. Thus, it can't be considered a defeat or threat or the like.

Does it make OBL feel all warm inside? I doubt it, but don't really care. I wouldn't be surprised if whatever we did he (or others with interests contrary to the US) would twist it to represent a weakness of the US/victory of their views. That's what people do and they will whether logical or correct or not (as I said in disagreeing with Heather's argument about the anti-CC rhetoric weakening the US people in her recent diavlog, too).

What seems to me a mistake (and weakness, perhaps -- oh, lord, I think I'm making a "the terrorists will win" argument) is to determine one's views or actions based on what OBL or some other such might think about them. For that matter, it seems a mistake to worry too much about whether a position one takes might please one's political enemies. Either a position is right or it's not, and whether it is or not doesn't depend on whether that position might also be agreed to by someone you hate or make that person happy.

This is really a lengthy aside, I know, but I think there's way too much refusal to consider reasonable compromises in political positions because of the fear of those of extreme views and feeling that any compromise will be seen by them as a victory. I think it gives extremists too much power over the conversation.

Back to the OBL victory, though, I think the US is a strong country with a strong culture (much as some of our political dialogue drives me nuts) and I don't get the fear that a few mosques (or the CC) will harm us, let alone cause us to enact sharia law or whatever soon.

(And I totally know you weren't saying that -- like I said, this is basically an aside.)
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 09-01-2010, 11:08 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Fair enough.

Here's something I came across today, but haven't read yet, but is apropos to our discussion:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...wsreel_opinion

A taste:

Quote:
Yet Muslims must do more than just talk about their great intellectual and cultural heritage. We must be at the forefront of those who reject violence and terrorism. And our activism must not end there. The tyrants and oppressive regimes that have been the real impediment to peace and progress in the Muslim world must hear our unanimous condemnation. The ball is in our court.
-Anwar Ibrahim
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 09-02-2010, 02:02 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Heh

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...57&sc=fb&cc=fp
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:21 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Sharia Law

Maintain gender separation in all public areas!
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:30 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Sharia Law

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
A little more on Kiryas Joel.

Needless to say, it's the conservative Christians who are most supportive of this measure, because they ultimately have the same set of preoccupations and concerns as conservative Jews and conservative Muslims. But if it was a community of Muslims doing this, Glenn Beck's Patriot Brigades would already be burning the town to the ground.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:35 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default RE: Sharia Law

Interesting:

Quote:
Kiryas Joel highest US poverty rate, census says

Times Herald-Record ^ | January 30, 2009 | Matt King

Posted on Fri Jan 30 2009

KIRYAS JOEL — This village has always had the distinction of being a cultural and religious enclave, but now it can add another:

Kiryas Joel is the poorest place in the country.

According to the latest round of U.S. Census figures, released late last year, the village has the highest poverty rate in the nation, and the largest percentage of residents who receive food stamps. Only one other place in the 50 states has a lower median income. The median household income in Kiryas Joel is $15,848; in Carbondale, Ill., it's $15,799.

More than two-thirds of Kiryas Joel residents live below the federal poverty line and more than 40 percent receive food stamps, according to the American Community Survey, a U.S. Census Bureau study of every place in the country with 20,000 residents or more.

That makes the village poorer than crumbling big cities like Detroit and noted slums like East St. Louis, and by far the poorest place in the mid-Hudson.

The poverty rate in Newburgh, the next-poorest place, is 28 percent. Regionwide, it's about 11.5 percent. Places in the country with poverty rates similar to Kiryas Joel are mostly college towns with large populations of students who don't have full-time jobs.

Village officials did not return calls seeking comment, but an expert in Hasidic communities said the poverty figures are tied strongly to the village's religious culture and mores.

Pressure to have many children and the demand to send them to expensive private schools, combined with a low number of people who go to college or leave the village to get higher-paying jobs, produces a static and poor society, said Samuel Heilman, professor of Jewish studies at Queens College.

"This is a population that sees childbirth as a sign of high status and for women a fulfillment of their divine and socially sanctioned role in life," Heilman said. "They are also an insular community that see life on the inside superior to the outside."

The tendency toward large families is borne out in the American Community Survey data.

The median age in the village is 14.4, meaning half of its more than 21,000 residents is 14 or younger.

Also, the village has the highest marriage rate in the country, with 80 percent of women ages 15 to 50 being married.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:39 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default One Woman - 2,000 Descendants

Truly amazing.

Quote:
God Said Multiply, and Did She Ever

WHEN [Kiryas Joel resident] Yitta Schwartz died last month at 93, she left behind 15 children, more than 200 grandchildren and so many great- and great-great-grandchildren that, by her family’s count, she could claim perhaps 2,000 living descendants.

Mrs. Schwartz was a member of the Satmar Hasidic sect, whose couples have nine children on average and whose ranks of descendants can multiply exponentially. But even among Satmars, the size of Mrs. Schwartz’s family is astonishing. A round-faced woman with a high-voltage smile, she may have generated one of the largest clans of any survivor of the Holocaust — a thumb in the eye of the Nazis.

Her descendants range in age from a 75-year-old daughter named Shaindel to a great-great-granddaughter born Feb. 10 named Yitta in honor of Mrs. Schwartz and a great-great-grandson born Feb. 15 who was named Moshe at his circumcision on Monday. Their numbers include rabbis, teachers, merchants, plumbers and truck drivers. But these many apples have not fallen far from the tree: With a few exceptions, like one grandson who lives in England, they mostly live in local Satmar communities, like Williamsburg in Brooklyn and Kiryas Joel, near Monroe, N.Y., where Mrs. Schwartz lived for the last 30 years of her life.

[...]
Just remember all the wingnut hysteria about multiplying Muslims.


(Source)
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:40 PM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: One Woman - 2,000 Descendants

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
Truly amazing.



Just remember all the wingnut hysteria about multiplying Muslims.


(Source)
The only hysteria in evidence here is your own.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:49 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Sharia Law

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Damn.
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:50 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: One Woman - 2,000 Descendants

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
Truly amazing.



Just remember all the wingnut hysteria about multiplying Muslims.


(Source)
TS, I find the use of the word 'wingnut' offensive.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 09-02-2010, 08:53 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: One Woman - 2,000 Descendants

Quote:
Originally Posted by look View Post
TS, I find the use of the word 'wingnut' offensive.
I'm sorry about that. It wasn't directed at you. If there weren't a whole lot of crazy people in the conservative movement, I wouldn't use it.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 09-02-2010, 09:08 PM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: One Woman - 2,000 Descendants

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
I'm sorry about that. It wasn't directed at you. If there weren't a whole lot of crazy people in the conservative movement, I wouldn't use it.
All this while liberals are stabbing muslim cabbies and taking hostages at the Discovery channel.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 09-02-2010, 09:28 PM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: One Woman - 2,000 Descendants

...oh and with 300,000+ crazy conservatives descending on Washington and the only story of violence was a ficticious throwing of a sandwich. Those crazy conservatives. I understand they picked up after themselves again too. Just nuts.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 09-02-2010, 10:13 PM
operative operative is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,261
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Good point. The idea, promulgated by Andrew McCarthy, that liberals are somehow in bed with sadistic fundamentalists because we hold the principle of cultural diversity dear is absolutely nuts.

Liberals support multiculturalism IN THE CONTEXT OF A PROFOUND RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS. I hate to play the bold and caps card, but it's really that simple.

I have never met (and never will) a progressive who says, "You know, if those guys want to excise the little girl's clitoris, that's fine. They have great tapestries and awesome music." Yet listening to right-wing ranting, you'd think half the Democratic Party had no objection to sexual mutilation and medieval punishments for relationships between consenting adults.
Without going too much into the research end, I can bring to mind those on the left who defend Hamas and join with Hamas and other Islamist groups.

At the very least, there is a certain tolerance for rather intolerable views on the part of some on the left.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 09-02-2010, 11:00 PM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by operative View Post
Without going too much into the research end, I can bring to mind those on the left who defend Hamas and join with Hamas and other Islamist groups.

At the very least, there is a certain tolerance for rather intolerable views on the part of some on the left.
Who? Where? In what way? Unless you've got a pretty bizarre definition of the left, one which includes lots of people that have absolutely nothing to do with electoral politics in the US, nobody I know of is doing this. You can't just accuse an entire ideological movement of conspiring with terrorist groups without details and links.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 09-02-2010, 11:21 PM
operative operative is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,261
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Who? Where? In what way? Unless you've got a pretty bizarre definition of the left, one which includes lots of people that have absolutely nothing to do with electoral politics in the US, nobody I know of is doing this. You can't just accuse an entire ideological movement of conspiring with terrorist groups without details and links.
But I didn't accuse an entire idealogical movement. I accused a subsection, specifically the Democracy Now!, Counterspin, etc. section. I heard an interview done on Counterspin in which the interviewer and the interviewee were both proponents of the anti-Jewish floatilla organizers.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 09-02-2010, 11:32 PM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by operative View Post
But I didn't accuse an entire idealogical movement. I accused a subsection, specifically the Democracy Now!, Counterspin, etc. section. I heard an interview done on Counterspin in which the interviewer and the interviewee were both proponents of the anti-Jewish floatilla organizers.
Gaza flotilla =/= Hamas. Is this really the best you've got? Would it kill you to provide names or links?
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 09-03-2010, 12:20 AM
operative operative is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,261
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Gaza flotilla =/= Hamas. Is this really the best you've got? Would it kill you to provide names or links?
They're both Islamist so there's basically no difference between the two.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 09-03-2010, 12:27 AM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: Culture War on Islam Edition (Adam Serwer & Eli Lake)

Quote:
Originally Posted by operative View Post
They're both Islamist so there's basically no difference between the two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by operative View Post
1) He toasted a radical Palestinian anti-Jewish activist at a private party, while yucking it up with anti-Semite Edward Said.
2) He has said that 'no one in the world is suffering more than the Palestinians', which suggests that he is either a) a benighted idiot who doesn't know what's going on in much of the world or b) casually anti-semitic.
3) He converted to Christianity under the guidance of an anti-semite and proceeded to attend that anti-semite's church for over twenty years.

I'd say there's a pretty good argument to make that Obama is a garden-variety anti-semite.
Hey look ... look ... we haz more wingnut.
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.