|
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 August 17 2016 00:43 SoSexy wrote:
Finally the UK did a good thing - they arrested that bastard Choudary. I hope he'll rot in jail.
It's nice but he was on welfare the whole time, or as he called it Jihad seeker's allowance. And now he's still being paid for by the state, just in a different place promising to radicalize those in jail. I have no idea how effective he'd be or whether he'd have any efficacy at all. But it is something France has a slight issue with as 70% of its inmates are Muslim.
|
On August 17 2016 02:02 SK.Testie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 00:43 SoSexy wrote:
Finally the UK did a good thing - they arrested that bastard Choudary. I hope he'll rot in jail. It's nice but he was on welfare the whole time, or as he called it Jihad seeker's allowance. And now he's still being paid for by the state, just in a different place promising to radicalize those in jail. I have no idea how effective he'd be or whether he'd have any efficacy at all. But it is something France has a slight issue with as 70% of its inmates are Muslim.
There are no ethnic/religious statistics in France, so the exact figure isn't known. The 70% one is an abusive extrapolation, apparently from a sociological research based on 4 prisons or from some old reporting based on 1 prison.
Prisons are a big problem, but apart from ritually saying that extremist prisoners should be separated from the other ones, politicians do little. The overcrowding rate reached the record of 120% (yet the former minister of Justice—who happened to be a Black woman—was always accused of being “permissive” by the right and the far-right). The prime minister Manuel Valls recently visited a prison where the overcrowding rate exceeded 200%.
And since two decades of securitarian propaganda brainwashed people into thinking that a penal policy based on someting else than mass incarceration = permissiveness, nothing will happen and prisons will continue to be factories for future terrorists.
|
On August 16 2016 20:52 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 11:17 IgnE wrote:On August 16 2016 06:52 WhiteDog wrote:On August 16 2016 06:45 IgnE wrote:
You have to admit that banning the burkini is pretty stupid. The birkini is banned in some place in morocco too. It's stupid, and I'm seriously surprised that the interdiction stand in regards to french laws, but well that's how it is. I have to say tho that in regards to what happened in Corse, it might be good to ban it just to prevent more conflicts. But tell me, do you think wearing the burkini or the burka to protest against its interdiction is good ? Because that's exactly what we were talking about previously. I think it might be good. Encroachments against freedom of speech/expression should be resisted. By putting on clothes restricted to women and forced upon them by some interpretation of islam and in some countries ? Personally I find that ridiculous.
Yeah it is ridiculous but so is the law. And some women, surely, want to wear the burkini. What right do we have to forbid them because it offends us? That is not the way to persuade.
|
According to The Telegraph, nine Iraqi refugees have been arrested in Austria on charges of gang-raping a 28-year-old German woman in a case that could ignite debate of immigration and crime ahead of this Autumn’s presidential election re-run.
The arrest of the nine Iraqis, all either asylum seekers or recently granted asylum, comes as Austria is preparing for a rerun of its May 22 presidential election, which the anti-immigrant Freedom Part lost by a margin of just 31,000 votes, despite leading handily in the polls, as a result of mailed in ballots, which in turn prompted accusations of voter tampering and manipulation. As a result, an Austrian Court ordered a re-vote to take place on October 2; and with just over one month left until the election, Hofer suddenly finds himself enjoying a substantial boost to his popularity as a result of events such as this one, sending shivers down the spine of Europe's status quo politicians.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-16/austrias-anti-immigration-presidential-candidate-resurgent-after-9-refugees-accused-
|
Don't worry dude - it's something rare, pre-elections propaganda, racial profiling, Austrian rape people too, just a coincidence, you sound a bit biased and racist 
Edit: I forgot 'it's our fault for wars and colonization'
|
On August 17 2016 18:28 SoSexy wrote:Don't worry dude - it's something rare, pre-elections propaganda, racial profiling, Austrian rape people too, just a coincidence, you sound a bit biased and racist Edit: I forgot 'it's our fault for wars and colonization'
2014 figures for Austrian rapes are at 839 and is on a decline after a peak nearing 1,000 in 2011. Assuming 2016 figures are about the same, it represents 0.001% of all events. Can you draw conclusions from that?
|
On August 17 2016 03:42 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 20:52 WhiteDog wrote:On August 16 2016 11:17 IgnE wrote:On August 16 2016 06:52 WhiteDog wrote:On August 16 2016 06:45 IgnE wrote:
You have to admit that banning the burkini is pretty stupid. The birkini is banned in some place in morocco too. It's stupid, and I'm seriously surprised that the interdiction stand in regards to french laws, but well that's how it is. I have to say tho that in regards to what happened in Corse, it might be good to ban it just to prevent more conflicts. But tell me, do you think wearing the burkini or the burka to protest against its interdiction is good ? Because that's exactly what we were talking about previously. I think it might be good. Encroachments against freedom of speech/expression should be resisted. By putting on clothes restricted to women and forced upon them by some interpretation of islam and in some countries ? Personally I find that ridiculous. Yeah it is ridiculous but so is the law. And some women, surely, want to wear the burkini. What right do we have to forbid them because it offends us? That is not the way to persuade.
I reject the idea that there is a "us" and a "them" - plus most of the people that wear the burkini / burka are not migrants, but french born in Frace most of the time.
But anyway, yeah there are many ridiculous things, I don't think making the burka your own is a good way to fight against oppressive laws, whichever it is. It's the best way to cut yourself from your base that just reject this dressing for rightful reason, and one of the reason the current left lost the people somewhere ; you can defend the right for anybody to dress as they want (an idea of freedom that anybody can relate to) without necessarily dressing this way yourself.
It's akin to saying that all women should protitute themselves to free the body of women from patriarchy ; when you wear the burka, you wear it to hide part of the woman body that are somehow filthy, there is a violent aspect that people forget a little too easily just because it's "them".
And let's not be naive, wearing the burka is the effect of a social pressure more than anything.
|
That is still no reason to forbid wearing it by law. BTW, with burka you mean concealment of the whole body, right? Here in Germany we know the word for what would technically be called a hijab, that's why I'm asking.
|
France266 Posts
On August 16 2016 21:09 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 10:46 Koorb wrote:
... Let's not forget that the case we're discussing is not the one of Syrian and Iraqi victims of the islamic state, but of burkini-clad women in France. Are you telling me that these women living in a secular republic can't go against peer pressure to wear islamic garments ? If your answer is that they can't, then surely you agree that the source of this social pressure has no place in our society and should be fought --> hence coercitive measures being taken against islamism. If your answer is that they can face up to peer pressure, then surely you agree that these women do wear these clothes as a statement of adhesion to hardline islamism ? 1) Why do you automatically assume that those clothes are worn because of pressure from male relatives? Can be, but it can also be the woman's choice; and sometimes male relatives actually aren't happy with that (some prefer discretion/invisibility). On a side note, I also find it funny that most people suddenly seem to (re)discover the concept of patriarchal pressures/injunctions only when it's linked to islam, as if otherwise women weren't subject to countless familial, cultural or social pressures... I am sure that feminists would be absolutely delighted if coercitive measures were taken against patriarchy with the same vigor! 2) What makes you so adamant about those clothes being the expression of some political project, rather than their personal interpretation of religion, or some classic form of religious puritanism (for the burkini)?
1) Free will in this instance is not a black and white issue. Social pressure and fear of being rejected by the muslim community/family are powerful drivers of islamic orthodox practices, as OtherWorld said earlier.
2) This particular interpretation of religion constitutes the political project. Politics and religion are closely intertwined for islamists. In fact, this is the very playbook of the muslim brotherhood.
On August 16 2016 21:21 OtherWorld wrote:
[...]But why fight the ideology itself, ie "coercitive measures being taken against islamism", as you put it? Did the existence of the ETA (829 deaths) justify the establishment of coercitive measures against the idea of Basque independence? Does the existence of Buddhist Terrorism in Sri Lanka or Thailand justify coercitive measures against the politicized Buddhist ideology? Does the presence of casseurs in many demonstrations mean that the principles behind these demonstrations are bad? [...]
Well, the existence of ETA did lead to harsh coercitive measures being taken against the whole independence movement, both in France and in Spain. And ETA was ultimately stamped out, and left with no other alternative than to disarm. Yay for coercitive measures?
On August 16 2016 21:21 OtherWorld wrote:
We both agree that a hardline islamist vision of the world is not what we want. But I think it is much more efficient not to take coercitive measures against it, because it will only make it stronger : look at the way the FN rose to proeminence in 2012 (or at Dieudonné vs Valls, or at literally everything) and you'll see that martyrdom is a powerful tool, and that the more an entity can pretend to be the victim, the more they'll gain traction and approval.
I strongly disagree that "martyrdom" is a factor in rise of the FN. Their appeal comes from their unorthodox stance in issues such as immigration, modern French society, our relationship with Europe and our place in the concert of nations. Especially since the mainstream parties are quite out of touch with the electorate on this topics.
If martyrdom was such a game-changer, then the FN would have been much stronger during the late 80's and the 90's, when it was getting a much much harder time in the media and in the mainstream political discourse.
On August 16 2016 21:21 OtherWorld wrote:
No, as long as you're not actually trampling upon others' freedom, "supporting radical islamism" by doing things such as wearing a burkini should not be considered as a crime or a bad behavior. We don't care what the ideology preaches as much as what factually happens.
The two are intertwined, and you can't fight the latter without adressing the former. A cleric preaching hate will beget actual violence. See Anjem Choudary in the UK for example: he never lifted a finger against anyone, he was just a preacher. But how many influencable young men took his word for it and went to Syria? At least a hundred, according to the police! How many crimes were committed over there because of him?
Same reasoning works for our niqab/burka/burkini owners. They may not seem toxic for society at the first glance, but just think of the social pressure they apply on fellow young muslim women who are basically reminded that they are impudic for not wearing these garments! Just think of how children will be led to think that the female body is shameful, and must be hidden...
On August 16 2016 21:21 OtherWorld wrote:
Now don't get me wrong : I'm not saying that a Lacoste polo is the same thing as a burkini. I'm saying, though, that the underlying mechanism for wearing either are fundamentally the same - assuming the individual chose to wear it freely, of course - , though they (greatly) differ in the intensity of their expression. And I'm saying that yes, most of the time you'll "segregate yourself" (since you see it that way ; I personally consider that segregation can only come from those who segregate, not from those who are subject to said segregation) by wearing what you wear. Why do people choose to wear quality clothes, if not to differenciate themselves from the masses in the street? Why do people chose to wear bling-bling stuff, if not to make sure they appear as rich to everyone? Etc
I agree that the mechanism is more or less the same, but its outcome will be radically different depending on which societal end it is applied to. There's a reason why totalitarian regimes always come with a specific visual identity for their clothing, from the brown shirts to the salafi beards : it erases the sense of individuality for its members, and it turns anyone who's not adhering to the movement into an other, into an enemy.
|
On August 17 2016 22:00 schaf wrote:
That is still no reason to forbid wearing it by law. BTW, with burka you mean concealment of the whole body, right? Here in Germany we know the word for what would technically be called a hijab, that's why I'm asking.
Nikab hides the entire body but let the face, the burqa hides everything.
Well the burkini does not cover the face, but since it has "burk" in its name, I think it was intended to be a burka for water, but I guess having tissue on the face would prove to be impossible with water ? I don't know it was made like five years ago in australia.
|
|
|
On August 17 2016 19:02 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 03:42 IgnE wrote:On August 16 2016 20:52 WhiteDog wrote:On August 16 2016 11:17 IgnE wrote:On August 16 2016 06:52 WhiteDog wrote:On August 16 2016 06:45 IgnE wrote:
You have to admit that banning the burkini is pretty stupid. The birkini is banned in some place in morocco too. It's stupid, and I'm seriously surprised that the interdiction stand in regards to french laws, but well that's how it is. I have to say tho that in regards to what happened in Corse, it might be good to ban it just to prevent more conflicts. But tell me, do you think wearing the burkini or the burka to protest against its interdiction is good ? Because that's exactly what we were talking about previously. I think it might be good. Encroachments against freedom of speech/expression should be resisted. By putting on clothes restricted to women and forced upon them by some interpretation of islam and in some countries ? Personally I find that ridiculous. Yeah it is ridiculous but so is the law. And some women, surely, want to wear the burkini. What right do we have to forbid them because it offends us? That is not the way to persuade. I reject the idea that there is a "us" and a "them" - plus most of the people that wear the burkini / burka are not migrants, but french born in Frace most of the time. But anyway, yeah there are many ridiculous things, I don't think making the burka your own is a good way to fight against oppressive laws, whichever it is. It's the best way to cut yourself from your base that just reject this dressing for rightful reason, and one of the reason the current left lost the people somewhere ; you can defend the right for anybody to dress as they want (an idea of freedom that anybody can relate to) without necessarily dressing this way yourself. It's akin to saying that all women should protitute themselves to free the body of women from patriarchy ; when you wear the burka, you wear it to hide part of the woman body that are somehow filthy, there is a violent aspect that people forget a little too easily just because it's "them". And let's not be naive, wearing the burka is the effect of a social pressure more than anything.
there is an atomic-level "us" that includes me and you whitedog and a "them" that includes the class of at least one woman who wants to wear a burqa. im not drawing lines between "us" westerners and "them" brown people. but like i said before, its easy to protest that the burka is a form of cultural violence against women. the hard case is thinking about what to do in the case of the women who truly want to wear it.
|
you call it fashion.
the problem here is that the change comes from outside/it's perceived as coming from outside; if it would've came from inside no one would give a fuck.
this whole islam thing set up as: they came here to change us so obviously it'll get resisted/fought over.
(ps: my opinion is that OtherWorld has no idea how the world works and just wants to buy it a Coke and WhiteDog is blinded by his idealized and perfect rainbow: black/white/brown/yellow, black/white/brown/yellow; he has this thing, it's like a fetish for that perfect cocktail of ... people.
yes there's an us and a them and it starts from us the family vs them the neighbors then it just goes up in size(dimension, proportion, magnitude, extent etc), value and ideology bounded).
|
On August 17 2016 18:28 SoSexy wrote:Don't worry dude - it's something rare, pre-elections propaganda, racial profiling, Austrian rape people too, just a coincidence, you sound a bit biased and racist Edit: I forgot 'it's our fault for wars and colonization'
One of the things people talk about with history in context to why there is so much resentment between peoples doesn't add up. By all measure, a bunch of Europeans who've warred with each other over the centuries should have some serious resentment and way higher crime rates towards one another for all the wrongs of the past. I could imagine a few French acting out against British / Germans and vice versa and many other countries as well when they're staying in whichever country. A bunch of Polish men raping a German man, "THIS IS FOR THE INVASION!!!"
Instead they just name call each other and have a drink.
|
On August 18 2016 00:06 xM(Z wrote:
you call it fashion.
the problem here is that the change comes from outside/it's perceived as coming from outside; if it would've came from inside no one would give a fuck.
this whole islam thing set up as: they came here to change us so obviously it'll get resisted/fought over.
(ps: my opinion is that OtherWorld has no idea how the world works and just wants to buy it a Coke and WhiteDog is blinded by his idealized and perfect rainbow: black/white/brown/yellow, black/white/brown/yellow; he has this thing, it's like a fetish for that perfect cocktail of ... people.
yes there's an us and a them and it starts from us the family vs them the neighbors then it just goes up in size(dimension, proportion, magnitude, extent etc), value and ideology bounded).
What I believe deeply is that ideas are performative in the sense that they create representations and, through them, structure your daily life, your feelings, your way of understanding reality.
"Us" and "them" is a retroactive reality that exist merely because we collectively consider that having or not quality X is somehow a relevant distinction to make.
If yourself accept that the debate is defined by race or religious confession only, there's no way out.
So yeah I am an idealist.
On August 17 2016 23:22 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 19:02 WhiteDog wrote:On August 17 2016 03:42 IgnE wrote:On August 16 2016 20:52 WhiteDog wrote:On August 16 2016 11:17 IgnE wrote:On August 16 2016 06:52 WhiteDog wrote:On August 16 2016 06:45 IgnE wrote:
You have to admit that banning the burkini is pretty stupid. The birkini is banned in some place in morocco too. It's stupid, and I'm seriously surprised that the interdiction stand in regards to french laws, but well that's how it is. I have to say tho that in regards to what happened in Corse, it might be good to ban it just to prevent more conflicts. But tell me, do you think wearing the burkini or the burka to protest against its interdiction is good ? Because that's exactly what we were talking about previously. I think it might be good. Encroachments against freedom of speech/expression should be resisted. By putting on clothes restricted to women and forced upon them by some interpretation of islam and in some countries ? Personally I find that ridiculous. Yeah it is ridiculous but so is the law. And some women, surely, want to wear the burkini. What right do we have to forbid them because it offends us? That is not the way to persuade. I reject the idea that there is a "us" and a "them" - plus most of the people that wear the burkini / burka are not migrants, but french born in Frace most of the time. But anyway, yeah there are many ridiculous things, I don't think making the burka your own is a good way to fight against oppressive laws, whichever it is. It's the best way to cut yourself from your base that just reject this dressing for rightful reason, and one of the reason the current left lost the people somewhere ; you can defend the right for anybody to dress as they want (an idea of freedom that anybody can relate to) without necessarily dressing this way yourself. It's akin to saying that all women should protitute themselves to free the body of women from patriarchy ; when you wear the burka, you wear it to hide part of the woman body that are somehow filthy, there is a violent aspect that people forget a little too easily just because it's "them". And let's not be naive, wearing the burka is the effect of a social pressure more than anything. there is an atomic-level "us" that includes me and you whitedog and a "them" that includes the class of at least one woman who wants to wear a burqa. im not drawing lines between "us" westerners and "them" brown people. but like i said before, its easy to protest that the burka is a form of cultural violence against women. the hard case is thinking about what to do in the case of the women who truly want to wear it.
Yes and you can defend their right to wear it without necessarily agreeing with the idea, doing it yourself, or somehow try to present it has a moral behavior. Because it is not moral by humanist and egalitarian standard.
"I disagree with what you say [or do], but but I will defend to the death your right to say it [or do it]'.
I feel like many activists sometimes believe doing what will stir shit up is the best idea - what will compromise the power. So in the midst of the political debate, putting the burkini on is productive in foucauldian terms, it has weight, but you risk to alienate a part of the people that disagree with the burkini for moral reason but should be with you because they directly face the violence of the state in their daily life (the worker class).
|
On August 17 2016 19:02 WhiteDog wrote:
when you wear the burka, you wear it to hide part of the woman body that are somehow filthy, there is a violent aspect that people forget a little too easily just because it's "them".
And let's not be naive, wearing the burka is the effect of a social pressure more than anything.
Sure, but do these laws help remove some of that pressure and make fewer women wear burkas/niqabs? Or do they just make the lives of those women even more miserable by restricting where they can go?
|
On August 18 2016 01:00 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 19:02 WhiteDog wrote:
when you wear the burka, you wear it to hide part of the woman body that are somehow filthy, there is a violent aspect that people forget a little too easily just because it's "them".
And let's not be naive, wearing the burka is the effect of a social pressure more than anything. Sure, but do these laws help remove some of that pressure and make fewer women wear burkas/niqabs? Or do they just make the lives of those women even more miserable by restricting where they can go?
The “anti-burqa” law in France was a fiasco. Some women (most of them being converts) actually started wearing those clothes specifically after the bill. Some are “harassed” and controlled several times, some are never controlled, so they keep wearing it. Cops themselves say that enforcing it is difficult/impossible sometimes, due to risks of protests or even riots. They also say that they have more important things to do… Some rich Algerian guy is actually paying most of the fines to protest against the law (1500 sanctions were recorded from 2011 to last year). Passing this bill for a completely marginal practice (a few hundreds women out of 33 millions) made no sense.
|
On August 18 2016 01:00 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2016 19:02 WhiteDog wrote:
when you wear the burka, you wear it to hide part of the woman body that are somehow filthy, there is a violent aspect that people forget a little too easily just because it's "them".
And let's not be naive, wearing the burka is the effect of a social pressure more than anything. Sure, but do these laws help remove some of that pressure and make fewer women wear burkas/niqabs? Or do they just make the lives of those women even more miserable by restricting where they can go?
That is the real question, isn't it? Will this change anything or just cause the women who have to wear them to be unable to leave the house or go out in public?
|
Probably not, if anything the law is going to be ignored or husbands are going to lock their women up. This is about as effective as drug prohibition
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I'm inclined to agree with the skeptics of anti-burqa laws. The goal might be lofty but this just screams unintended consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
