|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On October 30 2020 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 08:50 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 08:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 08:01 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 06:04 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 05:30 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Nah, cartoons insulting the prophet are more important than genocides or travel bans. Gotta have one’s priorities in order, naturally. I sincerely hope people don't actually think it's just about the cartoons? Colonialism casts a long shadow. That it does, that said there seems to have been a far bigger reaction in the Islamic world to Macron’s comments than what I recalled from the US President talking about banning movement from those countries. The West has innumerable historic crimes to answer for in the colonial domain, that said there are people across the globe more outraged by Charlie Hebdo cartoons than somebody being killed for having them on display. Running parallel to that is Erdogan’s ongoing project to de-secularise Turkey and actively trying to push away from a Europe that was gradually moving to bring them into the fold. I would agree that geopolitical events are complex and people's interaction with them nuanced. There's a lot of valid and/or political reasons besides "they just care about cartoons because they're so insecure" for what you're seeing. It's just degradingly reductive in my view. That one of the Charlie Hebdo attackers was put in prison for recruiting fighters against the west in Iraq after seeing prisoners tortured by the US military is demonstrative of the exact opposite of the notion that they aren't upset by far more than just the cartoons and rhetoric (even if that's what acts as a particular catalyst at a given time). Well yes it’s part of the pipeline of radicalisation, that said bombing an Ariana Grande concert or killing cartoonists doesn’t seem a particularly sensible outlet for such (justified) rage and dissatisfaction. Aside from my own moral objections on a pragmatic level too I think the instincts of the populist right re Islam in the West should be resisted strongly precisely because they fuel the dislocation and dissatisfaction that in extreme cases leads to tragic events Foreign policy, colonialism and the structures of the religion itself are all pertinent factors and yes it is reductive to singularly stress one or the other, I was merely making light of an extremely dark situation rather than reflecting my opinions on this issue. I just hear echoes of "they hate us for our freedom"
Not an exact translation but very similar to a Macron quote from the last few days.
|
Northern Ireland25073 Posts
On October 30 2020 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 08:50 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 08:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 08:01 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 06:04 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 05:30 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Nah, cartoons insulting the prophet are more important than genocides or travel bans. Gotta have one’s priorities in order, naturally. I sincerely hope people don't actually think it's just about the cartoons? Colonialism casts a long shadow. That it does, that said there seems to have been a far bigger reaction in the Islamic world to Macron’s comments than what I recalled from the US President talking about banning movement from those countries. The West has innumerable historic crimes to answer for in the colonial domain, that said there are people across the globe more outraged by Charlie Hebdo cartoons than somebody being killed for having them on display. Running parallel to that is Erdogan’s ongoing project to de-secularise Turkey and actively trying to push away from a Europe that was gradually moving to bring them into the fold. I would agree that geopolitical events are complex and people's interaction with them nuanced. There's a lot of valid and/or political reasons besides "they just care about cartoons because they're so insecure" for what you're seeing. It's just degradingly reductive in my view. That one of the Charlie Hebdo attackers was put in prison for recruiting fighters against the west in Iraq after seeing prisoners tortured by the US military is demonstrative of the exact opposite of the notion that they aren't upset by far more than just the cartoons and rhetoric (even if that's what acts as a particular catalyst at a given time). Well yes it’s part of the pipeline of radicalisation, that said bombing an Ariana Grande concert or killing cartoonists doesn’t seem a particularly sensible outlet for such (justified) rage and dissatisfaction. Aside from my own moral objections on a pragmatic level too I think the instincts of the populist right re Islam in the West should be resisted strongly precisely because they fuel the dislocation and dissatisfaction that in extreme cases leads to tragic events Foreign policy, colonialism and the structures of the religion itself are all pertinent factors and yes it is reductive to singularly stress one or the other, I was merely making light of an extremely dark situation rather than reflecting my opinions on this issue. I just hear echoes of "they hate us for our freedom" in the fixation by some in the west on the notion that they are responding to cartoons in isolation, rather than centuries of context that reflect much more poorly on the west. I wasn't even going to say anything until it got to: Show nested quote + The fact that so many muslims are outraged, but outraged, by some fucking drawings while their muslim co-religionaries are being oppressed and killed all over is one of the most weird and disturbing phenomenon in today's world. The amount of insecurity of those people is just hard to fathom.
and no one said anything.
Well nobody said anything because on a surface level that’s a pretty fair observation.
Simplistic yes, but not entirely off-base. If we’re talking actual religious persecution eliciting outrage it seems China is rather a bigger offender here than Macron’s France.
|
On October 30 2020 09:58 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 08:50 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 08:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 08:01 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 06:04 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 05:30 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Nah, cartoons insulting the prophet are more important than genocides or travel bans. Gotta have one’s priorities in order, naturally. I sincerely hope people don't actually think it's just about the cartoons? Colonialism casts a long shadow. That it does, that said there seems to have been a far bigger reaction in the Islamic world to Macron’s comments than what I recalled from the US President talking about banning movement from those countries. The West has innumerable historic crimes to answer for in the colonial domain, that said there are people across the globe more outraged by Charlie Hebdo cartoons than somebody being killed for having them on display. Running parallel to that is Erdogan’s ongoing project to de-secularise Turkey and actively trying to push away from a Europe that was gradually moving to bring them into the fold. I would agree that geopolitical events are complex and people's interaction with them nuanced. There's a lot of valid and/or political reasons besides "they just care about cartoons because they're so insecure" for what you're seeing. It's just degradingly reductive in my view. That one of the Charlie Hebdo attackers was put in prison for recruiting fighters against the west in Iraq after seeing prisoners tortured by the US military is demonstrative of the exact opposite of the notion that they aren't upset by far more than just the cartoons and rhetoric (even if that's what acts as a particular catalyst at a given time). Well yes it’s part of the pipeline of radicalisation, that said bombing an Ariana Grande concert or killing cartoonists doesn’t seem a particularly sensible outlet for such (justified) rage and dissatisfaction. Aside from my own moral objections on a pragmatic level too I think the instincts of the populist right re Islam in the West should be resisted strongly precisely because they fuel the dislocation and dissatisfaction that in extreme cases leads to tragic events Foreign policy, colonialism and the structures of the religion itself are all pertinent factors and yes it is reductive to singularly stress one or the other, I was merely making light of an extremely dark situation rather than reflecting my opinions on this issue. I just hear echoes of "they hate us for our freedom" in the fixation by some in the west on the notion that they are responding to cartoons in isolation, rather than centuries of context that reflect much more poorly on the west. I wasn't even going to say anything until it got to: The fact that so many muslims are outraged, but outraged, by some fucking drawings while their muslim co-religionaries are being oppressed and killed all over is one of the most weird and disturbing phenomenon in today's world. The amount of insecurity of those people is just hard to fathom.
and no one said anything. Well nobody said anything because on a surface level that’s a pretty fair observation. Simplistic yes, but not entirely off-base. If we’re talking actual religious persecution eliciting outrage it seems China is rather a bigger offender here than Macron’s France.
I obviously disagree with the portrayal in western media of China's handling of religious extremism and separatism/regional conflict regarding Uighurs in Xinjiang and don't think it's appropriate to hash that out here. I also consider it naked whataboutism.
While I understand the inclination to blame cartoons or freedom (or whatever Macron said), 'surface level' is being overly gracious in description of such an observation imo.
|
Northern Ireland25073 Posts
On October 30 2020 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 09:58 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 08:50 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 08:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 08:01 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 30 2020 06:04 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 05:30 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Nah, cartoons insulting the prophet are more important than genocides or travel bans. Gotta have one’s priorities in order, naturally. I sincerely hope people don't actually think it's just about the cartoons? Colonialism casts a long shadow. That it does, that said there seems to have been a far bigger reaction in the Islamic world to Macron’s comments than what I recalled from the US President talking about banning movement from those countries. The West has innumerable historic crimes to answer for in the colonial domain, that said there are people across the globe more outraged by Charlie Hebdo cartoons than somebody being killed for having them on display. Running parallel to that is Erdogan’s ongoing project to de-secularise Turkey and actively trying to push away from a Europe that was gradually moving to bring them into the fold. I would agree that geopolitical events are complex and people's interaction with them nuanced. There's a lot of valid and/or political reasons besides "they just care about cartoons because they're so insecure" for what you're seeing. It's just degradingly reductive in my view. That one of the Charlie Hebdo attackers was put in prison for recruiting fighters against the west in Iraq after seeing prisoners tortured by the US military is demonstrative of the exact opposite of the notion that they aren't upset by far more than just the cartoons and rhetoric (even if that's what acts as a particular catalyst at a given time). Well yes it’s part of the pipeline of radicalisation, that said bombing an Ariana Grande concert or killing cartoonists doesn’t seem a particularly sensible outlet for such (justified) rage and dissatisfaction. Aside from my own moral objections on a pragmatic level too I think the instincts of the populist right re Islam in the West should be resisted strongly precisely because they fuel the dislocation and dissatisfaction that in extreme cases leads to tragic events Foreign policy, colonialism and the structures of the religion itself are all pertinent factors and yes it is reductive to singularly stress one or the other, I was merely making light of an extremely dark situation rather than reflecting my opinions on this issue. I just hear echoes of "they hate us for our freedom" in the fixation by some in the west on the notion that they are responding to cartoons in isolation, rather than centuries of context that reflect much more poorly on the west. I wasn't even going to say anything until it got to: The fact that so many muslims are outraged, but outraged, by some fucking drawings while their muslim co-religionaries are being oppressed and killed all over is one of the most weird and disturbing phenomenon in today's world. The amount of insecurity of those people is just hard to fathom.
and no one said anything. Well nobody said anything because on a surface level that’s a pretty fair observation. Simplistic yes, but not entirely off-base. If we’re talking actual religious persecution eliciting outrage it seems China is rather a bigger offender here than Macron’s France. I obviously disagree with the portrayal in western media of China's handling of religious extremism and separatism/regional conflict regarding Uighurs in Xinjiang and don't think it's appropriate to hash that out here. I also consider it naked whataboutism. While I understand the inclination to blame cartoons or freedom (or whatever Macron said), 'surface level' is being overly gracious in description of such an observation imo.
That’s an issue of Western hypocrisy having started several wars in the Muslim world re China on such issues.
Which I think is a fair criticism, equally I don’t think it particularly explains the visceral reaction to Macron’s comments in the Muslim world vs their chosen course of reaction to other incidences of anti-Muslim conduct.
Or indeed the clear pattern of anti-non-Christian sentiment we’re seeing in places in Eastern Europe.
|
Are the extremist Muslims in France being radicalized by Saudi Wahhabism or is it some other source? Sorry if ignorant question I really don't know much except the beheadings happening.
|
On October 30 2020 04:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 03:57 Sent. wrote:On October 30 2020 03:45 Biff The Understudy wrote:A Charlie hebdo drawing. It says: In China Oighurs are persecuted - sleeps In Birmania the Rohingyas are being oppressed - sleeps In Africa, whole (muslim) villages are being massacred - sleeps In France, we draw - VENGEANCE!!! The fact that so many muslims are outraged, but outraged, by some fucking drawings while their muslim co-religionaries are being oppressed and killed all over is one of the most weird and disturbing phenomenon in today's world. The amount of insecurity of those people is just hard to fathom. This is a silly argument. A random Turk or Pakistani wouldn't find Xinjiang, Nigeria or Birma on the map, why would you expect them to be outraged about something they know nothing about? Do you think random dude in Pakistan knows much about France? Yet he goes on burning french flags and call on murder of French people because he heard someone there made a drawing. It's absurd. And if you haven't heard of China, you probably haven't heard of France either.
Maybe it's because people don't give a shit if other people they don't know get oppressed, but it hurts them directly when their god gets mocked at?
|
On October 30 2020 03:55 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 03:50 Starlightsun wrote:Very troubling.  Not sure how one could combat this without throwing more fuel on the fire. Well, one could start by not throwing more fuel on the fire. Banning things (like hijabs) that moderate muslims feel are integral to their faith pushes some of these to extremism. Work with moderates to eradicate extremists, don't push the moderates into their arms.
I don't think it is as simple as this. First of all you need to have a definition of "moderate" muslims. Would a moderate muslim even care about hijabs? Taking the country I live in as example - Germany - there is a significant Turkish minority. The overwhelming majority of them do identify as muslims and at the same time do not care about hijabs one bit. I know a fair bit of Iranian Germans that call themselves muslims but do not care about hijabs as well. Do muslims that consider hijabs to be "integral to their faith" even qualify as moderate? Taking central Europe (and Germany) as example again, who are the muslims that care about hijabs? Around here these are generally the people that come from extremely conservative/fundamentalist societies. It's normally not the people that go to the Turkey-funded mosques in Germany, it's the people that go to the Saudi-Arabia-funded mosques (albeit with Erdogan's swing towards fundamental Islam this may change). If we then take Belgium as an example of a European country flooded with Saudi-Arabian-funded mosques and a significant muslim minority that visits those, we see a notable muslim community that adheres to a fairly radical interpretation of Islam, refuses to integrate in the country they live in, and churns out extremists at a frightening pace.
Considering the above and looking at the issue of banning hijabs from a pragmatic point of view, what exactly could the result of it be?
a) Muslims that do not consider hijabs important to their faith: probably won't care too much about the ban, may be a bit upset about it, but probably won't start wearing/imposing hijabs just because of the ban. In the overwhelming majority of cases this will hardly cause any radicalisation in the this part of the muslim population.
b) Muslims that would normally like to wear/impose hijabs, but prefer to adhere to the laws of the country. Yes, it would upset the current population, but would hardly cause any increase in the degree of radicalisation amongst them. At the same time, their offspring will have to live in a manner that disregards fundamentalist principles of Islam. The parents, whether they like it or not, will be choosing to raise their children in a manner more suitable to Western society. For their children, this will sever the connection to more radical interpretations of Islam, and allow abstention from fundamentalist communities and an overall easier integration in the local society.
c) Muslims that will wear hijabs no matter what. These are mostly unwilling to integrate in the local society anyway. Banning hijabs or not will hardly change that. A hijab ban is unlikely to force them to abandon their beliefs and will not have any positive impact. At best some of their children, forced to accept the hijab ban in schools, will grow up believing that the rules imposed by Islam do not have to be taken too strictly, but that's of course hard to count on if these very same children are surrounded by fundametalists at home. The positive effects on society from the hijab ban would be minimal for this part of the muslim population, but would the negative effects be any worse than the status quo before the hijab ban? In the long run, would this yield a larger number of people drawn towards Islamism from this population than the number of people being spared Islamism from the previous two mentioned muslim populations?
On October 30 2020 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 06:04 WombaT wrote:On October 30 2020 05:30 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Nah, cartoons insulting the prophet are more important than genocides or travel bans. Gotta have one’s priorities in order, naturally. I sincerely hope people don't actually think it's just about the cartoons? Colonialism casts a long shadow.
Do other crimes against humanity cast a long shadow as well? Should the people in Balkan countries start "retaliating" against their muslim populations for the attrocities commited by the Ottoman empire well into the mid-to-late 19th century? How long does kin liability last? Should protestants and catholics across central Europe start "punishing" eachother for the attrocities commited during the 30 Years' War? Or if you don't want to go back in time that much, should the French and Germans return to "hating on" eachother for the centuries of warfare in the past 200 years? How about the countries ravaged by WW2? Using events that have happened before one's life-time to justify outrage and violence is a pityful excuse for inappropriate behavior and a hindrance to reaching a civilized society.
|
On October 30 2020 11:07 ggrrg wrote:
Do other crimes against humanity cast a long shadow as well? Should the people in Balkan countries start "retaliating" against their muslim populations for the attrocities commited by the Ottoman empire well into the mid-to-late 19th century? How long does kin liability last? Should protestants and catholics across central Europe start "punishing" eachother for the attrocities commited during the 30 Years' War? Or if you don't want to go back in time that much, should the French and Germans return to "hating on" eachother for the centuries of warfare in the past 200 years? How about the countries ravaged by WW2? Using events that have happened before one's life-time to justify outrage and violence is a pityful excuse for inappropriate behavior and a hindrance to reaching a civilized society.
Colonialism is not something that belongs to the distant past and has no influence on the world today, its effects are still around us. It helped shape what is the first world and the third world, for example. With that distinction granted, I find your example of the Balkans interesting because I'm under the impression that there is indeed a lot of antimuslim sentiment there, and that is something that I would have attributed to this history of occupation. So, like, yeah, kind of? It's not the same but there are similar forces at play...
That was my main issue with the framing, and I would also question the "should" that you put in there. The idea is never that anybody "should" do terrorism.
|
Oh ok so they are freedom fighters. I thought they were the bad guys. Thanks for the clarification.
Still don't quite get why they murder and decapitate people who draw the prophet or show said drawings, but that's probably anti colonial and anyway, that's a minor detail. Cartoonists, teachers or colonial armies, it's all the same.
Recap for the lulz:
Cartoonists : We have the right to draw religious figure
Islamists : This is blasphemy and we will avenge the prophet
Islamists : * Mass murder cartoonists *
Islamists : We have avenged the prophet exactly as we said so
Cartoonists survivors : We will republish those anyway
Islamists : * Massacre more people *
Islamists : We massacred more people because you insulted the prophet again.
GH and Nebuchad : You think it's about cartoons! Haha, noobs! Colonialism!
|
On October 30 2020 10:46 DucK- wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 04:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 30 2020 03:57 Sent. wrote:On October 30 2020 03:45 Biff The Understudy wrote:A Charlie hebdo drawing. It says: In China Oighurs are persecuted - sleeps In Birmania the Rohingyas are being oppressed - sleeps In Africa, whole (muslim) villages are being massacred - sleeps In France, we draw - VENGEANCE!!! The fact that so many muslims are outraged, but outraged, by some fucking drawings while their muslim co-religionaries are being oppressed and killed all over is one of the most weird and disturbing phenomenon in today's world. The amount of insecurity of those people is just hard to fathom. This is a silly argument. A random Turk or Pakistani wouldn't find Xinjiang, Nigeria or Birma on the map, why would you expect them to be outraged about something they know nothing about? Do you think random dude in Pakistan knows much about France? Yet he goes on burning french flags and call on murder of French people because he heard someone there made a drawing. It's absurd. And if you haven't heard of China, you probably haven't heard of France either. Maybe it's because people don't give a shit if other people they don't know get oppressed, but it hurts them directly when their god gets mocked at?
Maybe they should get their priorities straight.
|
On October 30 2020 16:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Oh ok so they are freedom fighters. I thought they were the bad guys. Thanks for the clarification.
Still don't quite get why they murder and decapitate people who draw the prophet or show said drawings, but that's probably anti colonial and anyway, that's a minor detail. Cartoonists, teachers or colonial armies, it's all the same.
Recap for the lulz:
Cartoonists : We have the right to draw religious figure
Islamists : This is blasphemy and we will avenge the prophet
Islamists : * Mass murder cartoonists *
Islamists : We have avenged the prophet exactly as we said so
Cartoonists survivors : We will republish those anyway
Islamists : * Massacre more people *
Islamists : We massacred more people because you insulted the prophet again.
GH and Nebuchad : You think it's about cartoons! Haha, noobs! Colonialism!
Are your politics literally just "find out what GH thinks about something and then say the opposite"?
|
Yes, as we know, tensions between France and Islam/Muslims began after a reaction to a provocative cartoon and continues because of them.
I expect better from you frankly. I think I should stop.
|
On October 30 2020 17:10 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 16:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Oh ok so they are freedom fighters. I thought they were the bad guys. Thanks for the clarification.
Still don't quite get why they murder and decapitate people who draw the prophet or show said drawings, but that's probably anti colonial and anyway, that's a minor detail. Cartoonists, teachers or colonial armies, it's all the same.
Recap for the lulz:
Cartoonists : We have the right to draw religious figure
Islamists : This is blasphemy and we will avenge the prophet
Islamists : * Mass murder cartoonists *
Islamists : We have avenged the prophet exactly as we said so
Cartoonists survivors : We will republish those anyway
Islamists : * Massacre more people *
Islamists : We massacred more people because you insulted the prophet again.
GH and Nebuchad : You think it's about cartoons! Haha, noobs! Colonialism! Are your politics literally just "find out what GH thinks about something and then say the opposite"?
You would be surprised that I am a little bit annoyed that butchers who massacred my favourite cartoonists for the very explicit reasons of blasphemy and insult to the prophet are being reframed as anti colonial fighters.
On October 30 2020 17:13 GreenHorizons wrote:
Yes, as we know, tensions between France and Islam/Muslims began after a reaction to a provocative cartoon and continues because of them.
I expect better from you frankly. I think I should stop.
Tensions between France and islam have many layers, exist in many forms and for many reasons sometimes totally independently of each other, some of it having to do with laicity, some with the rather deplorable situation of muslim in France and some with freedom of expression in the context of muslim fundamentalism.
Charlie attacks has to do with the latter, and nothing to do with colonialism whatsoever. As a matter of fact, Denmark was a target for the same cartoons, it doesn't have much of a colonial history. The place where the reactions have been the strongest, such as Pakistan, have zero colonial history with France.
|
On October 30 2020 17:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 17:10 Nebuchad wrote:On October 30 2020 16:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Oh ok so they are freedom fighters. I thought they were the bad guys. Thanks for the clarification.
Still don't quite get why they murder and decapitate people who draw the prophet or show said drawings, but that's probably anti colonial and anyway, that's a minor detail. Cartoonists, teachers or colonial armies, it's all the same.
Recap for the lulz:
Cartoonists : We have the right to draw religious figure
Islamists : This is blasphemy and we will avenge the prophet
Islamists : * Mass murder cartoonists *
Islamists : We have avenged the prophet exactly as we said so
Cartoonists survivors : We will republish those anyway
Islamists : * Massacre more people *
Islamists : We massacred more people because you insulted the prophet again.
GH and Nebuchad : You think it's about cartoons! Haha, noobs! Colonialism! Are your politics literally just "find out what GH thinks about something and then say the opposite"? You would be surprised that I am a little bit annoyed that butchers who massacred my favourite cartoonists for the very explicit reasons of blasphemy and insult to the prophet are being reframed as anti colonial fighters.
That didn't answer my question.
(Thanks for the answer below!)
|
On October 30 2020 17:20 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2020 17:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 30 2020 17:10 Nebuchad wrote:On October 30 2020 16:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Oh ok so they are freedom fighters. I thought they were the bad guys. Thanks for the clarification.
Still don't quite get why they murder and decapitate people who draw the prophet or show said drawings, but that's probably anti colonial and anyway, that's a minor detail. Cartoonists, teachers or colonial armies, it's all the same.
Recap for the lulz:
Cartoonists : We have the right to draw religious figure
Islamists : This is blasphemy and we will avenge the prophet
Islamists : * Mass murder cartoonists *
Islamists : We have avenged the prophet exactly as we said so
Cartoonists survivors : We will republish those anyway
Islamists : * Massacre more people *
Islamists : We massacred more people because you insulted the prophet again.
GH and Nebuchad : You think it's about cartoons! Haha, noobs! Colonialism! Are your politics literally just "find out what GH thinks about something and then say the opposite"? You would be surprised that I am a little bit annoyed that butchers who massacred my favourite cartoonists for the very explicit reasons of blasphemy and insult to the prophet are being reframed as anti colonial fighters. That didn't answer my question.
You want to know if I have a particular agenda against GH? No. I would have been annoyed at anyone writing those posts.
|
Charlie attacks has ... nothing to do with colonialism whatsoever I know you know at least some of the history between Algeria/Tunisia and colonial France, that these attacks are from 1st-3rd generation immigrants from those countries, and that the conditions (including social) they experience in France are deplorable, and yet you insist this known anti-western war fighter recruiter was really only upset about the cartoon.
I'd get if it was some 19 yo guy who posted a tweet saying "oh you've done it now!' on a tweet of the cartoon or something. But these guys trained with/recruited for Al Qaeda (as one testified after going from a "occasional Muslim" to a radical recruiter because of US torturing Muslims in Iraq) long before the Charlie Hebdo attacks.
I'm not arguing about whether they were freedom fighters or whatever. I'm pointing out they obviously had a lot more motivating them than insecurity about a cartoon.
|
On October 30 2020 18:21 GreenHorizons wrote: I know you know at least some of the history between Algeria/Tunisia and colonial France, that these attacks are from 1st-3rd generation immigrants from those countries, and that the conditions (including social) they experience in France are deplorable, and yet you insist this known anti-western war fighter recruiter was really only upset about the cartoon. I'd get if it was some 19 yo guy who posted a tweet saying "oh you've done it now!' on a tweet of the cartoon or something. But these guys trained with/recruited for Al Qaeda (as one testified after going from a "occasional Muslim" to a radical recruiter because of US torturing Muslims in Iraq) long before the Charlie Hebdo attacks. I'm not arguing about whether they were freedom fighters or whatever. I'm pointing out they obviously had a lot more motivating them than insecurity about a cartoon.
1. Extremists in the whole muslim world get berserk every time those cartoons are published. From Pakistanese mobs to Erdogan both of which have nothing to do with French colonial history.
2. The terrorists have said explicitly that they were avenging the prophet. Not that they were pissed at France because colonialism.
3. Other countries with no muslim colonial history got targeted just as well for the same cartoons.
4. Muslims in muslim countries that exercise satire are also killed by the same extremists, for the same reasons.
You can frame ANYTHING involving muslims and french as an effect of colonialism because, well, that's part of the context. It's still a piss poor analysis of the Charlie Hebdo attacks, but if trying to be Noam Chomsky is more important than thinking about the problem of freedom of speech and blasphemy in a globalized world, and the problem contemporary Islam has with those notions, be my guest.
Saying Charb and Cabu got assassinated because of French colonialism, meanwhile, is an obscenity.
|
I'm just curious if you remember the "First Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest", put on by the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) that Charb and Cabu inspired at this point?
|
|
|
Northern Ireland25073 Posts
I do myself recall that rather unedifying spectacle. Bigotry is a little like Potter Stewart's musings on pornography, I know it when I see it. Hard to define sometimes where the lines in the sand are drawn, I do think there's a marked difference between having the freedom to criticise whatever about Islam vs just wanting to dunk on Muslims because they're brown folk.
That contest very much felt rather motivated by the latter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://scontent.fosl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/123141722_2830953740487290_2965200899283216010_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=2&_nc_sid=110474&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_ohc=6tlL3KA7t9cAX8dBNyx&_nc_ht=scontent.fosl1-1.fna&tp=14&oh=06f82c576bdc9f2a429a47d664d19202&oe=5FBED610)
