Charlottesville: Where Do We Go From Here?

[Liriena]

Fundementally the reason the Nazi's protesters are worse than anti-fa is because if the Neo-nazi's take power they legitimately will commit genocide. The extermination, subjugation or expulsion of other races is a core concept to both neo-nazi's and white supremacists. Even the worst of anti-fa doesn't demand genocide based how you were born.

If muslims gain power they would legitmetly institute shariah law which is pretty horrible in itself, yet we rarley see them protesting that.

Taking into account the political history of the West, the far right have a far better chance of gaining substantial political power than Islamic fundamentalists do. There is no Islamic fundamentalist equivalent of the Front National in France, nor an Islamic fundamentalist equivalent of Trumpism.

There is little risk of Islamic fundamentalists successfully imposing extreme shariah law on all Americans, but history has shown us that far right ideas can get a lot of traction in the American public.

[Liriena]

Fundementally the reason the Nazi's protesters are worse than anti-fa is because if the Neo-nazi's take power they legitimately will commit genocide. The extermination, subjugation or expulsion of other races is a core concept to both neo-nazi's and white supremacists. Even the worst of anti-fa doesn't demand genocide based how you were born.

uh

The Khmer Rouge was secretly Western antifa or something?

Also, given that antifa tends to lean towards the more libertarian and internationalist left, it's kind of... dumb... to try to paint them as equivalent to the Khmer Rouge.

Also... didn't the very much not communist United States support the Khmer Rouge?

[Liriena]

Are you arguing that Pol Pot was an anarchist, or just that his ideas about creating a utopian agricultural socialist society are shared by the majority of anti-fascist protesters?

The political economy of socialism points towards Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot. Anarcho-communism is an oxymoron.

Did you just cite a right-wing libertarian think tank as a source on how anarcho-communism is an "oxymoron"?

top kek

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Fundementally the reason the Nazi's protesters are worse than anti-fa is because if the Neo-nazi's take power they legitimately will commit genocide. The extermination, subjugation or expulsion of other races is a core concept to both neo-nazi's and white supremacists. Even the worst of anti-fa doesn't demand genocide based how you were born.

If muslims gain power they would legitmetly institute shariah law which is pretty horrible in itself, yet we rarley see them protesting that.

"muh ebul shariah"
It isn't even something you would live under. Only we would.
Sorry for the threadjack.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

If muslims gain power they would legitmetly institute shariah law which is pretty horrible in itself, yet we rarley see them protesting that.

What are the chances of that actually happening though?

Unfortunately, sitting on 'none'.

[Vassenor]

What are the chances of that actually happening though?

Unfortunately, sitting on 'none'.

I wouldn't call not being able to institute theocracy "unfortunate".

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Unfortunately, sitting on 'none'.

I wouldn't call not being able to institute theocracy "unfortunate".

I don't think any kaafir* would.

*If you are religious, I apologize for making assumptions, disregard this post

[Proctopeo]

I wouldn't call not being able to institute theocracy "unfortunate".

I don't think any kaafir would.

There are some theocrats of non-Islamic religions, but they seem to be much less numerous.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Fundementally the reason the Nazi's protesters are worse than anti-fa is because if the Neo-nazi's take power they legitimately will commit genocide. The extermination, subjugation or expulsion of other races is a core concept to both neo-nazi's and white supremacists. Even the worst of anti-fa doesn't demand genocide based how you were born.

If muslims gain power they would legitmetly institute shariah law which is pretty horrible in itself, yet we rarley see them protesting that.

They don't protest that beacuse:

A: It would need a whole new amendment to the constitution beacuse such a thing would be against Freedom of Speech and the whole concept of secular goverment

B: No one would ever vote a group that persistently demands shariah law on a daily basis.

C: The whole idea is completely unrealistic

D: No, they wouldn't. Muslim people in power in 1st world countries don't actually do that. If so the why hasn't the City of London under shariah law right now?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

non-Islamic religions

Lolwat?

[Proctopeo]

non-Islamic religions

Lolwat?

The intention was "religions that aren't some kind of Islam".

[El-Amin Caliphate]

B: No one would ever vote a group that persistently demands shariah law on a daily basis.

Except pious Muslims. Maybe not openly, but still.

D: No, they wouldn't. Muslim people in power in 1st world countries don't actually do that. If so the why hasn't the City of London under shariah law right now?

Parts of London had been under a vigilante Shari'ah actually

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Lolwat?

The intention was "religions that aren't some kind of Islam".

But there aren't any.

[Proctopeo]

The intention was "religions that aren't some kind of Islam".

But there aren't any.

Yes there are, from the standpoint of the definition of religion.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

But there aren't any.

Yes there are, from the standpoint of the definition of religion.

Fine. Show me 'religions that are some kind of Islam'.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

B: No one would ever vote a group that persistently demands shariah law on a daily basis.

Except pious Muslims.

D: No, they wouldn't. Muslim people in power in 1st world countries don't actually do that. If so the why hasn't the City of London under shariah law right now?

Parts of London had been under a vigilante Shari'ah actually

There is that, but they are the minority in countries that are fine with secular governments.

That person has no legal authority to arrest people. So he doesn't count.

And that sounds bad.

[Proctopeo]

Yes there are, from the standpoint of the definition of religion.

Fine. Show me 'religions that are some kind of Islam'.

Islam.
Islam is a religion that is a kind of Islam.
I was more specifying sects - whether you believe they should or do exist or not - by my statement.
A Sunni theocrat might not get along with a Shia theocrat.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

I was more specifying sects - whether you believe they should or do exist or not - by my statement.

Ooooh ok.

A Sunni theocrat might not get along with a Shia theocrat.

Yeah, sectarianism is a plague in the Ummah.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Except pious Muslims.

Parts of London had been under a vigilante Shari'ah actually

There is that, but they are the minority in countries that are fine with secular governments.

That person has no legal authority to arrest people. So he doesn't count.

And that sounds bad.

Of course it sounds bad; vigilantism is bad! Especially religious vigilantism!

[Proctopeo]

I was more specifying sects - whether you believe they should or do exist or not - by my statement.

Ooooh ok.

A Sunni theocrat might not get along with a Shia theocrat.

Yeah, sectarianism is a plague in the Ummah.

It's nice we got that cleared up.

[Vassenor]

B: No one would ever vote a group that persistently demands shariah law on a daily basis.

Except pious Muslims. Maybe not openly, but still.

D: No, they wouldn't. Muslim people in power in 1st world countries don't actually do that. If so the why hasn't the City of London under shariah law right now?

Parts of London had been under a vigilante Shari'ah actually

[citation needed]

[Luminesa]

Except pious Muslims. Maybe not openly, but still.

Parts of London had been under a vigilante Shari'ah actually

[citation needed]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... cks-london

Google is a wonderful thing and you should use it.

Also, it's rather surprising that you're questioning a Muslim about the stuff they have seen in their own religion. Wasn't questioning Muslims Islamophobic, Vass? Ah wait. The only Muslims you defend are the imaginary Muslims who would defend all of your views in return, who are not people but poor, defenseless caricatures who constantly need a white knight to rescue them. When actual Muslims speak, however, and mention actual current events taking place in reality, then they need to cite their sources. Rather strange, I'd say, or maybe not.

[Vassenor]

[citation needed]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... cks-london

Google is a wonderful thing and you should use it.

Also, it's rather surprising that you're questioning a Muslim about the stuff they have seen in their own religion. Wasn't questioning Muslims Islamophobic, Vass? Ah wait. The only Muslims you defend are the imaginary Muslims who would defend all of your views in return, who are not people but poor, defenseless caricatures who constantly need a white knight to rescue them. When actual Muslims speak, however, and mention actual current events taking place in reality, then they need to cite their sources. Rather strange, I'd say, or maybe not.

Did that really need the tirade and the shoving words in my mouth?

[Luminesa]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... cks-london

Google is a wonderful thing and you should use it.

Also, it's rather surprising that you're questioning a Muslim about the stuff they have seen in their own religion. Wasn't questioning Muslims Islamophobic, Vass? Ah wait. The only Muslims you defend are the imaginary Muslims who would defend all of your views in return, who are not people but poor, defenseless caricatures who constantly need a white knight to rescue them. When actual Muslims speak, however, and mention actual current events taking place in reality, then they need to cite their sources. Rather strange, I'd say, or maybe not.

Did that really need the tirade and the shoving words in my mouth?

What you needed to do was Google. But since you don't do Google, and you don't believe an actual Muslim when they're talking to you, there's really not much else to be said than "yes'. If you don't wanna take the heat, honey, you can leave the kitchen.

[Vassenor]

Did that really need the tirade and the shoving words in my mouth?

What you needed to do was Google. But since you don't do Google, and you don't believe an actual Muslim when they're talking to you, there's really not much else to be said than "yes'. If you don't wanna take the heat, honey, you can leave the kitchen.

So when did I say it was Islamophobic to question something a Muslim said?

And for the record, three guys randomly screaming at people in the street is not "vigilante-enforced sharia". Not any more than the random bible thumpers are trying to enforce Christian theocracy.