Diversity and Multiculturalism II:Make Diversity Great Again

[Napkiraly]

Why is it always people like Dahon who always come to the defense of Deobandis, Wahhabis, Salafists, etc implementing themselves into our societies, even though they'd be the first people tossed off the top of a building or stoned to death if said groups were ever able to take over.

[Nolo gap]

diversity is the default conditions of reality, denial of this is ignorance (or at the very least a failure to honestly observe).
no idea why this would be any big deal unless someone really hated logic.

[Dahon]

Why is it always people like Dahon who always come to the defense of Deobandis, Wahhabis, Salafists, etc implementing themselves into our societies, even though they'd be the first people tossed off the top of a building or stoned to death if said groups were ever able to take over.

Well, one is that the violent extremists wouldn't take over. Not in my country and not in yours.

The other reason is this: there is a world of difference between an unarmed man and an armed one, an ultraconservative preacher preaching hatred and perfection and an extremist demagogue baptizing apostles with arms and ammunition (or, since this is Britain, knives).

I am repulsed by both, but one is going to pump lead on me and the other one has vowed not to. If one can let a fundamentalist Mormon, an ultra-Orthodox Jew, or an Amish live their lives in peace, one can let an ultraconservative but nonviolent Muslim live in peace, physically unmolested, but not free from criticism, ridicule, even mockery.

[Kowani]

Why is it always people like Dahon who always come to the defense of Deobandis, Wahhabis, Salafists, etc implementing themselves into our societies, even though they'd be the first people tossed off the top of a building or stoned to death if said groups were ever able to take over.

Well, one is that the violent extremists wouldn't take over. Not in my country and not in yours.

The other reason is this: there is a world of difference between an unarmed man and an armed one, an ultraconservative preacher preaching hatred and perfection and an extremist demagogue baptizing apostles with arms and ammunition (or, since this is Britain, knives).

I am repulsed by both, but one is going to pump lead on me and the other one has vowed not to. If one can let a fundamentalist Mormon, an ultra-Orthodox Jew, or an Amish live their lives in peace, one can let an ultraconservative but nonviolent Muslim live in peace, physically unmolested, but not free from criticism, ridicule, even mockery.

I mean, the preacher will end up radicalizing the demagogues who do go around "baptizing apostles with arms and ammunition".

[Dahon]

There's that risk, yes, but it's still a leap from, say, "gays are evil and immoral!" to "throw them all of the topmost minaret!" I mean, Westboro Baptist Church is a thing. Condemn the ideology if you must, talk to them about how homophobia, sexism, et cetera aren't cricket if you must, but as long as they're not plotting to raid the nearest offending whatever and execute the lot, leave them be.

[-Ocelot-]

The debate in America nowadays in a nutshell

Trump's supporters: DAMN DARKIES GO BACK TO YOUR COUNTRY THIS IS A WHITE MAN'S NATION!

Antifa: OH GOD I HATE BEING WHITE AND WANNA DIE, IM SO EVIL!

Me: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! SHUT UP FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!

alien explorers: *Leaves*

The difference being that antifa is a bunch of disorganized people with no political power while trump supporters are millions and have elected a far-right government into power.

[Post War America]

The debate in America nowadays in a nutshell

Trump's supporters: DAMN DARKIES GO BACK TO YOUR COUNTRY THIS IS A WHITE MAN'S NATION!

Antifa: OH GOD I HATE BEING WHITE AND WANNA DIE, IM SO EVIL!

Me: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! SHUT UP FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!

alien explorers: *Leaves*

The difference being that antifa is a bunch of disorganized people with no political power while trump supporters are millions and have elected a far-right government into power.

Doing violent things is only wrong if you're on the left dontcha know?

[Napkiraly]

Why is it always people like Dahon who always come to the defense of Deobandis, Wahhabis, Salafists, etc implementing themselves into our societies, even though they'd be the first people tossed off the top of a building or stoned to death if said groups were ever able to take over.

Well, one is that the violent extremists wouldn't take over. Not in my country and not in yours.

The other reason is this: there is a world of difference between an unarmed man and an armed one, an ultraconservative preacher preaching hatred and perfection and an extremist demagogue baptizing apostles with arms and ammunition (or, since this is Britain, knives).

I am repulsed by both, but one is going to pump lead on me and the other one has vowed not to. If one can let a fundamentalist Mormon, an ultra-Orthodox Jew, or an Amish live their lives in peace, one can let an ultraconservative but nonviolent Muslim live in peace, physically unmolested, but not free from criticism, ridicule, even mockery.

The Deobandi preacher saying he's against terrorism is still going to want to have you executed if his dreams of implementing sharia come to fruition peacefully. And they are very, very active in getting new converts and getting moderate Muslim communities to conform to their standards. This isn't just ultra-conservative "make adultery illegal and tell women to cover up" type of stuff. Most Deobandis are okay with things like amputation for theft, death for homosexuality, death for apostates, etc.

[Napkiraly]

How do you square away these sentiments:

Whatever motivates people to fuck Nazis so thoroughly they won't know the meaning of revival if it slaps them right in the fucking face, the better, I say. Give them the benefit of the doubt and they'll dogwhistle all over you till they have complete control and the only thing you do is haul your ass and kick you out -- of the country, off solid ground, off less hot weather, into the afterlife...

... better to overreact and crush them than to under react and let them crush you.

With allowing the nice, ever so loving, Deobandis, Salafists, etc to live in relative peace and harmony?

[Post War America]

How do you square away these sentiments:

Whatever motivates people to fuck Nazis so thoroughly they won't know the meaning of revival if it slaps them right in the fucking face, the better, I say. Give them the benefit of the doubt and they'll dogwhistle all over you till they have complete control and the only thing you do is haul your ass and kick you out -- of the country, off solid ground, off less hot weather, into the afterlife...

... better to overreact and crush them than to under react and let them crush you.

With allowing the nice, ever so loving, Deobandis, Salafists, etc to live in relative peace and harmony?

Ideally, all of them would be removed. Unfortunately we must focus on the Nazis for now since they're far more likely to achieve their political goals in the west, and people can only seem to focus on one at a time.

[Dahon]

Well, one is that the violent extremists wouldn't take over. Not in my country and not in yours.

The other reason is this: there is a world of difference between an unarmed man and an armed one, an ultraconservative preacher preaching hatred and perfection and an extremist demagogue baptizing apostles with arms and ammunition (or, since this is Britain, knives).

I am repulsed by both, but one is going to pump lead on me and the other one has vowed not to. If one can let a fundamentalist Mormon, an ultra-Orthodox Jew, or an Amish live their lives in peace, one can let an ultraconservative but nonviolent Muslim live in peace, physically unmolested, but not free from criticism, ridicule, even mockery.

The Deobandi preacher saying he's against terrorism is still going to want to have you executed if his dreams of implementing sharia come to fruition peacefully. And they are very, very active in getting new converts and getting moderate Muslim communities to conform to their standards. This isn't just ultra-conservative "make adultery illegal and tell women to cover up" type of stuff. Most Deobandis are okay with things like amputation for theft, death for homosexuality, death for apostates, etc.

I know that. Which is why you counter them, not by deporting the lot, but by impressing upon them that the Quran is not absolute.

[Napkiraly]

The Deobandi preacher saying he's against terrorism is still going to want to have you executed if his dreams of implementing sharia come to fruition peacefully. And they are very, very active in getting new converts and getting moderate Muslim communities to conform to their standards. This isn't just ultra-conservative "make adultery illegal and tell women to cover up" type of stuff. Most Deobandis are okay with things like amputation for theft, death for homosexuality, death for apostates, etc.

I know that. Which is why you counter them, not by deporting the lot, but by impressing upon them that the Quran is not absolute.

So you're up for giving Richard Spencer a platform and debate him? Because prior statements about his type seems to indicate otherwise.

[Aellex]

How do you square away these sentiments:

With allowing the nice, ever so loving, Deobandis, Salafists, etc to live in relative peace and harmony?

Ideally, all of them would be removed. Unfortunately we must focus on the Nazis for now since they're far more likely to achieve their political goals in the west, and people can only seem to focus on one at a time.

Why not focus on the guys who've killed 500+ in Europe alone in just the last couple of years first, rather?
They're the ones doing actual damage, not the """Nazis""".

[Aellex]

I know that. Which is why you counter them, not by deporting the lot, but by impressing upon them that the Quran is not absolute.

Good luck on that because that very statement is blasphemy of the highest degree according to the Coran.

[Post War America]

Ideally, all of them would be removed. Unfortunately we must focus on the Nazis for now since they're far more likely to achieve their political goals in the west, and people can only seem to focus on one at a time.

Why not focus on the guys who've killed 500+ in Europe alone in just the last couple of years first, rather?
They're the ones doing actual damage, not the """Nazis""".

Because they're not the ones in a position to seize power and use the violence potential of the state. 500 is awful yes, but its far less than what the state can do.

[Napkiraly]

Why not focus on the guys who've killed 500+ in Europe alone in just the last couple of years first, rather?
They're the ones doing actual damage, not the """Nazis""".

Because they're not the ones in a position to seize power and use the violence potential of the state. 500 is awful yes, but its far less than what the state can do.

Not focusing on the ones killing people is giving free propaganda to the types you don't want seizing power, making it easier for them to actually seize power. As an FYI.

[Aellex]

Because they're not the ones in a position to seize power and use the violence potential of the state. 500 is awful yes, but its far less than what the state can do.

Cracking down on Islamists would be the best way to deal with the far-right, tho, since it's the pusillanimity and complacency of the authorities toward the former that is doing so much to radicalise people into the latter.

[Trumptonium1]

Why is it always people like Dahon who always come to the defense of Deobandis, Wahhabis, Salafists, etc implementing themselves into our societies, even though they'd be the first people tossed off the top of a building or stoned to death if said groups were ever able to take over.

You can take joy in knowing that most Western liberals won't find asylum if their countries go to shit via their decisions.

[Post War America]

Because they're not the ones in a position to seize power and use the violence potential of the state. 500 is awful yes, but its far less than what the state can do.

Not focusing on the ones killing people is giving free propaganda to the types you don't want seizing power, making it easier for them to actually seize power. As an FYI.

Unfortunately the types who are more likely to seize power will use the very presence of people of the same ethnic or religious family regardless of where they fall within it as propaganda. Alternatively, we could instead focus on the powerful in the Salafist movement and actively crush the Saudi regime, or at least stop handing them the resources necessary to export and normalize their vile ideology.

[Dahon]

How do you square away these sentiments:

Whatever motivates people to fuck Nazis so thoroughly they won't know the meaning of revival if it slaps them right in the fucking face, the better, I say. Give them the benefit of the doubt and they'll dogwhistle all over you till they have complete control and the only thing you do is haul your ass and kick you out -- of the country, off solid ground, off less hot weather, into the afterlife...

... better to overreact and crush them than to under react and let them crush you.

With allowing the nice, ever so loving, Deobandis, Salafists, etc to live in relative peace and harmony?

Don't put words into my mouth. I do not think them nice or ever-loving. I am not for bigotry or for violence. If you think this is not fulsome enough a condemnation, the person typing this is the same child who couldn't think of bin Laden without violent, gory rage and fury for months after 9/11, the same child who wrote a screeching away on bin Laden for class a month after the fact.


At the same time, as much as I abhor their thoughts, it is important to remember that between the thought and the act lies a big trench, and I for one would rather keep it unfilled.

[Napkiraly]

Unfortunately the types who are more likely to seize power will use the very presence of people of the same ethnic or religious family regardless of where they fall within it as propaganda.

Yes but it's going to be a lot harder for them to convince people if the state is capable of cracking down on the violent types and every attempt to try and place assimilation pressures onto said communities isn't decried.

[Post War America]

Unfortunately the types who are more likely to seize power will use the very presence of people of the same ethnic or religious family regardless of where they fall within it as propaganda.

Yes but it's going to be a lot harder for them to convince people if the state is capable of cracking down on the violent types and every attempt to try and place assimilation pressures onto said communities isn't decried.

That's fair I suppose. I wish though that solution existed within acceptable political conversation in between remove everyone who happens to belong to the same very broad religious and/or ethnic category, and stop any attempt at integration. Sadly it appears that is not the case as liberals, instead of actually talking about the ever increasing amount of intermixing populations like adults simply nod and say everything is fine. Whereas the other guys recognize that a problem exists but attempt to solve it by ethnic cleansing. Honestly, I'd be vaguely in favor of the French attempts at integration to a point, but if the end goal were to tackle Salafist ideology, I'd much prefer targeting the source than wasting time attempting to cure the symptoms of the plague.

[Napkiraly]

If you think this is not fulsome enough a condemnation

It's not. As your old quote shows, you have absolutely zero issues cracking down on the likes of the Nazis. I think you allow yourself to treat pieces of shit with not too dissimilar attitudes as Nazis a bit more lightly simply because a lot of them happen to be brown. Which I suppose is a form of positive bigotry in a way? Though the implications are quite negative.

>Nazis hold a few marches, only one of which can be considered actually large
"Man fuck those guys, I'm all for whatever fucks them over so much"

>Deobandis set up underground sharia courts, produce a pretty huge chunk of jihadists in Western Europe, converting once moderate communities that, if not beginning to assimilate, at least lived in peaceful coexistence into segregated communities that help spur increased xenophobia among the host population
"We just gotta tell them the Quran isn't the bees knees"

[Kubumba Tribe]

the Quran is not absolute.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=441628&p=34844176#p34844176

moderate Muslim

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=441628&p=34844176#p34844176

Why is it always people like Dahon who always come to the defense of Deobandis, Wahhabis, Salafists, etc implementing themselves into our societies, even though they'd be the first people tossed off the top of a building or stoned to death if said groups were ever able to take over.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=441628&p=34844176#p34844176

Because they're not the ones in a position to seize power and use the violence potential of the state. 500 is awful yes, but its far less than what the state can do.

Cracking down on Islamists

Which type(s)?

If you think this is not fulsome enough a condemnation

It's not. As your old quote shows, you have absolutely zero issues cracking down on the likes of the Nazis. I think you allow yourself to treat pieces of shit with not too dissimilar attitudes as Nazis a bit more lightly simply because a lot of them happen to be brown. Which I suppose is a form of positive bigotry in a way? Though the implications are quite negative.

>Nazis hold a few marches, only one of which can be considered actually large
"Man fuck those guys, I'm all for whatever fucks them over so much"

>Deobandis set up underground sharia courts, produce a pretty huge chunk of jihadists in Western Europe, converting once moderate communities that, if not beginning to assimilate, at least lived in peaceful coexistence into segregated communities that help spur increased xenophobia among the host population
"We just gotta tell them the Quran isn't the bees knees"

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=441628&p=34844176#p34844176

Why is it always people like Dahon who always come to the defense of Deobandis, Wahhabis, Salafists, etc implementing themselves into our societies, even though they'd be the first people tossed off the top of a building or stoned to death if said groups were ever able to take over.

You can take joy in knowing that most Western liberals won't find asylum if their countries go to poop via their decisions.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Y'know, it genuinely baffles me that many LGBT+ peeps would support certain Islamic sects that would probably torture and kill them faster than I can say what LGBT stands for...