Leftists have, can, and should oppose Islam

[Neo Telangana]

I consider myself a leftist (broadly speaking), and it irritates me immensely when I see people say things along the lines of "leftists/multiculturalists/cultural Marxists (whatever the hell that means) are supporting Muslims and Islam". Do people not know the history of the left-wing and its admirable struggle against organized religion across the globe?

• The original leftists, the French revolutionaries, were immensely anti-clerical and opposed to the Catholic Church. They carried out one of the world's first modern de-Christianization campaigns.
• The leftist regime of Plutarcho Elias Calles led a great pro-secular, anti-clerical campaign against the Catholic Church in Mexico.
• The leftist Young Turks and later Kemalists of Turkey promoted secularism, created a progressive republican nation-state, and abolished the Caliphate. They banned the hijab from public places and greatly promoted women's rights.
• The Bolsheviks stomped Islam out of public life in Central Asia, and gave unprecedented rights and freedom to Central Asian women.
• The Soviets fought to support the socialist government in Afghanistan and uphold civilization and progress against the uncivilized and backwards Islamists. After the Soviets withdrew and the Taliban established their dominance by the mid-90s, Afghanistan was plunged into a regressive, barbaric, quasi-medieval state of hellish proportions.
• In my own country of Telangana, Communists organized a great peasant rebellion in the 1940s against oppressive landlords and the Islamic state of Hyderabad.

This is just a small list, and can probably be extended easily. Given this glorious history of fighting against religious barbarism and backwardness on all continents of the globe, are modern leftists too pusillanimous with regards to Islam? Have leftists forgotten what it means to be a leftist?

[MERIZoC]

The "struggles" of the left-wing around the globe "against" religion have been considerably less than admirable.

[Nierra]

I consider myself a leftist (broadly speaking), and it irritates me immensely when I see people say things along the lines of "leftists/multiculturalists/cultural Marxists (whatever the hell that means) are supporting Muslims and Islam". Do people not know the history of the left-wing and its admirable struggle against organized religion across the globe?

• The original leftists, the French revolutionaries, were immensely anti-clerical and opposed to the Catholic Church. They carried out one of the world's first modern de-Christianization campaigns.
• The leftist regime of Plutarcho Elias Calles led a great pro-secular, anti-clerical campaign against the Catholic Church in Mexico.
• The leftist Young Turks and later Kemalists of Turkey promoted secularism, created a progressive republican nation-state, and abolished the Caliphate. They banned the hijab from public places and greatly promoted women's rights.
• The Bolsheviks stomped Islam out of public life in Central Asia, and gave unprecedented rights and freedom to Central Asian women.
• The Soviets fought to support the socialist government in Afghanistan and uphold civilization and progress against the uncivilized and backwards Islamists. After the Soviets withdrew and the Taliban established their dominance by the mid-90s, Afghanistan was plunged into a regressive, barbaric, quasi-medieval state of hellish proportions.
• In my own country of Telangana, Communists organized a great peasant rebellion in the 1940s against oppressive landlords and the Islamic state of Hyderabad.

This is just a small list, and can probably be extended easily. Given this glorious history of fighting against religious barbarism and backwardness on all continents of the globe, are modern leftists too pusillanimous with regards to Islam? Have leftists forgotten what it means to be a leftist?

Leftists have fought against institutionalized religion that contributes to or supports reckless barbarism in the name of religion.

Which modern Islam does not. Rather it is those who oppose Islam in general for a few fringe people who are inherently evil who have identified as Islam define their view on the entire religion and those who believe in it.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

I'm totally opposed to all organized religion. I believe the Abrahamic religions have been the worst and most violent throughout history. I also believe Islam, for some reason, got stuck/went back to the Dark Ages (wait, weren't Muslims actually really advancing at that point) at some point and that it is totally unacceptable for them to take their belief system so literally.

The Jews stopped. The Christians stopped. They generally aren't running countries that behead and stone people. Islam, it's your turn.

*acknowledges 'not all muslims' whatever ok*

[Neo Telangana]

Leftists have fought against institutionalized religion that contributes to or supports reckless barbarism in the name of religion.

Which modern Islam does not. Rather it is those who oppose Islam in general for a few fringe people who are inherently evil who have identified as Islam define their view on the entire religion and those who believe in it.

Modern Islam does not contribute to or support reckless barbarism in the name of religion? Have you ever taken a good look at Saudi Arabia? It is one of the few countries in the world that is still right-wing in the original, 18th century sense.

[Nierra]

Leftists have fought against institutionalized religion that contributes to or supports reckless barbarism in the name of religion.

Which modern Islam does not. Rather it is those who oppose Islam in general for a few fringe people who are inherently evil who have identified as Islam define their view on the entire religion and those who believe in it.

Modern Islam does not contribute to or support reckless barbarism in the name of religion? Have you ever taken a good look at Saudi Arabia? It is one of the few countries in the world that is still right-wing in the original, 18th century sense.

So Saudi Arabia's Government is a good reference point for understanding Islam?

[Romalae]

The leftist Young Turks and later Kemalists of Turkey promoted secularism, created a progressive republican nation-state, and abolished the Caliphate. They banned the hijab from public places and greatly promoted women's rights.

Yes, and what else did they famously do?

...start a YouTube channel, of course

This is just a small list, and can probably be extended easily. Given this glorious history of fighting against religious barbarism and backwardness on all continents of the globe, are modern leftists too pusillanimous with regards to Islam? Have leftists forgotten what it means to be a leftist?

Well, there's some pretty vocal left-wingers like Bill Maher and Sam Harris and the rest of the New Atheists who hold this view of Islam.

[Nerotysia]

Modern Islam does not contribute to or support reckless barbarism in the name of religion? Have you ever taken a good look at Saudi Arabia? It is one of the few countries in the world that is still right-wing in the original, 18th century sense.

So Saudi Arabia's Government is a good reference point for understanding Islam?

Are you implying that institutionalized Islam is free of blame, but institutionalized Christianity was so totally horrible and carries real blame? Islam has inspired institutions that do horrible things. Same with Christianity. Same with many other religions. What's the difference?

[Purger]

Kemal pasha was not a left-winger. His movement was nationalistic.

[Nierra]

So Saudi Arabia's Government is a good reference point for understanding Islam?

Are you implying that institutionalized Islam is free of blame, but institutionalized Christianity was so totally horrible and carries real blame? Islam has inspired institutions that do horrible things. Same with Christianity. Same with many other religions. What's the difference?

I can read an article on feminism and then commit crimes in the name of social equality. Is feminism to blame, or am I to blame?

[Souseiseki]

The "struggles" of the left-wing around the globe "against" religion have been considerably less than admirable.

depends on when and where really

[MERIZoC]

The leftist Young Turks and later Kemalists of Turkey promoted secularism, created a progressive republican nation-state, and abolished the Caliphate. They banned the hijab from public places and greatly promoted women's rights.

Yes, and what else did they famously do?

...start a YouTube channel, of course

This is just a small list, and can probably be extended easily. Given this glorious history of fighting against religious barbarism and backwardness on all continents of the globe, are modern leftists too pusillanimous with regards to Islam? Have leftists forgotten what it means to be a leftist?

Well, there's some pretty vocal left-wingers like Bill Maher and Sam Harris and the rest of the New Atheists who hold this view of Islam.

Those guys aren't really left. Progressive, maybe.

[Aethrys]

Are you implying that institutionalized Islam is free of blame, but institutionalized Christianity was so totally horrible and carries real blame? Islam has inspired institutions that do horrible things. Same with Christianity. Same with many other religions. What's the difference?

I can read an article on feminism and then commit crimes in the name of social equality. Is feminism to blame, or am I to blame?

Depends on if you were radicalized by feminist ideology into committing such crimes. In which case it would be you AND feminism at fault. Otherwise, just you.

[Nerotysia]

Are you implying that institutionalized Islam is free of blame, but institutionalized Christianity was so totally horrible and carries real blame? Islam has inspired institutions that do horrible things. Same with Christianity. Same with many other religions. What's the difference?

I can read an article on feminism and then commit crimes in the name of social equality. Is feminism to blame, or am I to blame?

That's hardly the same thing as an institution committing crimes, or an entire society doing so. Institutions are inherently different entities than individuals. I would argue that religion is not the root cause of violence, it is merely violent human nature using religion as an excuse to express itself. That does not mean that the excuse itself can't be criticized as well though.

However, if your crime was a hate crime, then one could argue the ideology was at least partially to blame.

Regardless that's all irrelevant. You seemed to be holding Islam and Christianity to different standards. That is blatant hypocrisy.

[MERIZoC]

So Saudi Arabia's Government is a good reference point for understanding Islam?

Are you implying that institutionalized Islam is free of blame, but institutionalized Christianity was so totally horrible and carries real blame? Islam has inspired institutions that do horrible things. Same with Christianity. Same with many other religions. What's the difference?

There is no difference. What it comes down to, is that it isn't religion, it's people. People insert their own ideas into scripture, not the other way around. Look in the Koran or the Bible, and you'll find plenty of arguments for being a terrible misogynist, or for being a champion of women's rights. Parts advocating war and violence, and parts advocating tolerance and peace. People are going to use scripture to justify their actions, no matter what side of an argument they're on. Abolitionists and slave owners alike took passages from the Bible to defend their beliefs. So feel free to attack the awful practices committed by institutions, from beheadings in Saudi Arabia to hangings in Iran, but remember that it doesn't help anyone to attack the concept used to justify those actions.

[MERIZoC]

I can read an article on feminism and then commit crimes in the name of social equality. Is feminism to blame, or am I to blame?

That's hardly the same thing as an institution committing crimes, or an entire society doing so. Institutions are inherently different entities than individuals. I would argue that religion is not the root cause of violence, it is merely violent human nature using religion as an excuse to express itself. That does not mean that the excuse itself can't be criticized as well though.

However, if your crime was a hate crime, then one could argue the ideology was at least partially to blame.

Regardless that's all irrelevant. You seemed to be holding Islam and Christianity to different standards. That is blatant hypocrisy.

No, he's not. You were the first one to bring up Christianity. Not him.

[Nierra]

I can read an article on feminism and then commit crimes in the name of social equality. Is feminism to blame, or am I to blame?

That's hardly the same thing as an institution committing crimes, or an entire society doing so. Institutions are inherently different entities than individuals. I would argue that religion is not the root cause of violence, it is merely violent human nature using religion as an excuse to express itself. That does not mean that the excuse itself can't be criticized as well though.

However, if your crime was a hate crime, then one could argue the ideology was at least partially to blame.

Regardless that's all irrelevant. You seemed to be holding Islam and Christianity to different standards. That is blatant hypocrisy.

Umm, no I hold them both to the same standard. That is neither religion is to blame, and religion is in no way shape or form the cause of all violence in this world. This is a blatant lie, and an over exaggerated myth that's been bloated by the left for a very long time.

The majority of wars throughout history were fought on resources, or political tension. Not religion, religion has served as an excuse quite often but one could hardly equate that as a way religion is inherently evil.

All these things are effected by how people use them and they are neither implicitly good or bad in and of themselves.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-ala ... 00766.html

[Aethrys]

Are you implying that institutionalized Islam is free of blame, but institutionalized Christianity was so totally horrible and carries real blame? Islam has inspired institutions that do horrible things. Same with Christianity. Same with many other religions. What's the difference?

There is no difference. What it comes down to, is that it isn't religion, it's people. People insert their own ideas into scripture, not the other way around. Look in the Koran or the Bible, and you'll find plenty of arguments for being a terrible misogynist, or for being a champion of women's rights. Parts advocating war and violence, and parts advocating tolerance and peace. People are going to use scripture to justify their actions, no matter what side of an argument they're on. Abolitionists and slave owners alike took passages from the Bible to defend their beliefs. So feel free to attack the awful practices committed by institutions, from beheadings in Saudi Arabia to hangings in Iran, but remember that it doesn't help anyone to attack the concept used to justify those actions.

So, your argument is that being indoctrinated with a set of values and world view that is repeatedly drilled into an individual's mind from their formative years all the way into adulthood has no bearing on how they will develop? Otherwise, that makes for a very strong argument for attacking the institution that helped with their cultural programming, and would stand to benefit a great many people.

[Dejanic]

The leftist Young Turks and later Kemalists of Turkey promoted secularism, created a progressive republican nation-state, and abolished the Caliphate. They banned the hijab from public places and greatly promoted women's rights.

Yes, and what else did they famously do?

...start a YouTube channel, of course

This is just a small list, and can probably be extended easily. Given this glorious history of fighting against religious barbarism and backwardness on all continents of the globe, are modern leftists too pusillanimous with regards to Islam? Have leftists forgotten what it means to be a leftist?

Well, there's some pretty vocal left-wingers like Bill Maher and Sam Harris and the rest of the New Atheists who hold this view of Islam.

Ahem, Sam Harris is a Conservative and a Neo Con, he isn't a "vocal left winger", Bill Maher is vocal, I'll give you that, but he's hardly a leftist, even centrist Obama fanboy types view him as right leaning, and other New Atheists like the late Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, were/are right leaning. I'd actually argue that New Atheism is actually quite incompatible with Leftism.

Anyway, I do criticize aspects of Islam, just like how I criticize aspects of all religions, but right wingers often have a habit of picking on Islam and on Muslims on a more racial/ethnic basis, which is thinly veiled under anti Islamic rhetoric, and that's certainly something that Leftists should oppose.

[The Black Forrest]

We are too busy smoking pot and telling the press to write bad things about conservatives.

[Neo Telangana]

So Saudi Arabia's Government is a good reference point for understanding Islam?

Why not? Its law code is based on the Quran, the central text of Islam. If you like, we can focus on many other countries like the Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and former Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan to understand how modern Islam "contributes to or supports reckless barbarism in the name of religion". There seems to be no shortage of examples.

This is just a small list, and can probably be extended easily. Given this glorious history of fighting against religious barbarism and backwardness on all continents of the globe, are modern leftists too pusillanimous with regards to Islam? Have leftists forgotten what it means to be a leftist?

Well, there's some pretty vocal left-wingers like Bill Maher and Sam Harris and the rest of the New Atheists who hold this view of Islam.

Is Sam Harris really a leftist? I haven't read his works, so I don't know.

As for Bill Maher, he is an insufferable hypocrite and idiot. He loves Israel so much that he wants America to sacrifice its own lives and money for the sake of the Jews (see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQR1d1ao_IM). He is also a scientifically illiterate conspiracy theorist who is anti-vaccine because he doesn't want the government to "inject disease into perfectly healthy human bodies" (see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB5DLf1Qt78). I feel ashamed as a leftist to be ideologically associated with a person like him.

[MERIZoC]

Yes, and what else did they famously do?

...start a YouTube channel, of course


Well, there's some pretty vocal left-wingers like Bill Maher and Sam Harris and the rest of the New Atheists who hold this view of Islam.

Ahem, Sam Harris is a Conservative and a Neo Con, he isn't a "vocal left winger", Bill Maher is vocal, I'll give you that, but he's hardly a leftist, even centrist Obama fanboy types view him as right leaning, and other New Atheists like the late Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, were/are right leaning. I'd actually argue that New Atheism is actually quite incompatible with Leftism.

Er, Harris has called himself a liberal, iirc, and Hitchens was a Marxist. Just pointing that out.

[Nierra]

So Saudi Arabia's Government is a good reference point for understanding Islam?

Why not? Its law code is based on the Quran, the central text of Islam. If you like, we can focus on many other countries like the Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and former Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan to understand how modern Islam "contributes to or supports reckless barbarism in the name of religion". There seems to be no shortage of examples.

Well, there's some pretty vocal left-wingers like Bill Maher and Sam Harris and the rest of the New Atheists who hold this view of Islam.

Is Sam Harris really a leftist? I haven't read his works, so I don't know.

As for Bill Maher, he is an insufferable hypocrite and a source of shame to leftists. He loves Israel so much that he wants America to sacrifice its own lives and money for the sake of the Jews (see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQR1d1ao_IM). He is also a scientifically illiterate conspiracy theorist who is anti-vaccine because he doesn't want the government to "inject disease into perfectly healthy human bodies (see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB5DLf1Qt78).

The difference being that "religious" Governments are routed in exerting power and political control rather than giving teachings of how to live your life the best way as good people have intended. So no, no Government is an adequate representation of any religion at all.

[MERIZoC]

That's hardly the same thing as an institution committing crimes, or an entire society doing so. Institutions are inherently different entities than individuals. I would argue that religion is not the root cause of violence, it is merely violent human nature using religion as an excuse to express itself. That does not mean that the excuse itself can't be criticized as well though.

However, if your crime was a hate crime, then one could argue the ideology was at least partially to blame.

Regardless that's all irrelevant. You seemed to be holding Islam and Christianity to different standards. That is blatant hypocrisy.

Umm, no I hold them both to the same standard. That is neither religion is to blame, and religion is in no way shape or form the cause of all violence in this world. This is a blatant lie, and an over exaggerated myth that's been bloated by the left for a very long time.

The majority of wars throughout history were fought on resources, or political tension. Not religion, religion has served as an excuse quite often but one could hardly equate that as a way religion is inherently evil.

All these things are effected by how people use them and they are neither implicitly good or bad in and of themselves.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-ala ... 00766.html

Hm, good read.

[Aethrys]

Ahem, Sam Harris is a Conservative and a Neo Con, he isn't a "vocal left winger", Bill Maher is vocal, I'll give you that, but he's hardly a leftist, even centrist Obama fanboy types view him as right leaning, and other New Atheists like the late Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, were/are right leaning. I'd actually argue that New Atheism is actually quite incompatible with Leftism.

Er, Harris has called himself a liberal, iirc, and Hitchens was a Marxist. Just pointing that out.

I'm a space alien.