| Forum Index > General Forum |
Read this before posting. Stay civil. As the news continues to develop, please remember no NSFW images or video. Thank you. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On January 23 2015 03:54 Sub40APM wrote: Did I read the article in the guardian right, is France going to start teaching patriotism classes ? Political leaders in France often say sensationalist things that never get done, most of the time for the best. (ranging from taking back the French nationality from terrorists (lol) to teaching morals classes like in the fifties). | ||
|
EtherealBlade
660 Posts
A 16 year old boy was arrested a week after the attacks on Charlie Hebdo. The boy's crime was posting a picture on Facebook of a man holding a Charlie Hebdo magazine, getting shot. While others might think this was 'too soon' after the attacks, the boy simply thought it was ironic and funny. While the media didn't report the photo, it seems that this one going around the internet is the one. It may seem pretty distasteful at first, but if you look closely, the magazine the man is holding is an actual cover used by Charlie Hebdo in July 2013 after the military coup in Egypt. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://media.carbonated.tv/130605_story__charlie-hebdo-cest-de-la-merdespotlight.jpg) There aren't a lot of sources for this atm. Is this real? | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On January 23 2015 06:00 WhiteDog wrote: Muslim having trouble integrating is not a factual statement, it's an interpretation. I'm not answering the rest it's pointless, I don't really want to engage in a deep discussion with a fan, but I believe this point is absolutly central to the topic. You compare this situation to the christian famillies in the US, which are two entirely different things : the muslim as a "community" in France do not exist, and there are no group that legitimatly talk for "the" muslims as a group (no common practice, in education for exemple - unlike the jewish "community"). This idea that there are trouble integrating "muslims" is untrue : we have "trouble" integrating (which mean small criminality in my mind) people coming from specific part of africa mostly - rarely a problem about Iranian immigrants for exemple or pakistanese (who happen to be muslim), not to mention we also have trouble integrating people coming from christian countries in southern Africa (central africa, ghana, gabon, ethiopia, angola or ivory coast - and many more countries - are all mostly christian). Not to mention, most of our problem with the youth has nothing to do with immigration, and more with exclusion, unemployment (and hypocrisy). Again, you're either not understanding what I explained to you about what Fourest said or you're willfully distorting it (at this point I'm wondering if it's a language issue, but since Fourest writes in French I'm guessing you're simply reading what you want to read - well, even though you haven't even read her). I did not compare "Muslim families" in general to "Christian families" in general in the US, or discuss the "Muslim community" or the "Christian community". In fact, I explicitly said I was not talking about "Muslim families" in general, or "Christian families" in general, but about the specific group of the Muslim families who opposed the curriculum and the specific group of the Christian families who opposed the curriculum (that's who Fourest was targeting). It's RIGHT THERE in the first paragraph of my previous message. Can you start paying attention already? I mean seriously, I even provided you with a frigging drawing. Let me repeat, then: Fourest is not saying that "Muslims" have trouble integrating, or that belief in Islam is an obstacle to integration. That's just not what she's saying! I've repeated this to you I don't know how many times, I just don't know how to make it any clearer. She is NOT highlighting Islam or the fact that some of them are Muslims as a factor to explain why some people don't integrate. Stop pretending otherwise. What she IS saying is this (I'm going to break it down to make it easier to understand): - There are some people who can have some trouble integrating (factual statement) - Among those people, some happen to be Muslims (factual statement) Ok, do you agree so far that these are both factual statements? Again, the vast majority of Muslims have no problem integrating and she's absolutely not saying the opposite. I repeat again: she is not saying that those who have trouble integrating are Muslim, or that "being Muslim" is to blame in any case. Now, what she is saying is that the people the extremist preachers are targeting and trying to radicalize are those Muslims who are having some trouble integrating. That's it! Do you get it already?! She's not even saying that these people will in fact follow the extremist preachers, but simply that these are the people being targeted by the extremist preachers. With regards to your last sentence, if you bothered to read Fourest you would see that she agrees with you: the problems and the reasons some people have trouble integrating primarily lie with socio-economic and urban policies & factors, xenophobia, racism, etc., and not with belonging to a religion or another. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
I never said that you considered the entire muslim population as a whole, I'm trying to put some senses in you. If the fact that they are muslim is not relevant to their integration problem, or to their desire to remove the shoah from history class, then why saying that they are muslim ? As I've tried to explain to you, there are thousands of other adjective that one could use to describe those population (worker class, from subsaharian africa, or from the sahel for exemple). She also textually said that it was "their faith" that explain their refusal from teaching the shoah - even if we are talking about a minority, and also implied that laïcity and the republic is in danger, clearly referring to the importance of their religious faith in this regard. The simple usage of the term muslim, to describe a population that is not entirely muslim, in a country where the muslim "community" as a whole is unorganized and almost inexistant, is an interpretation of reality and an assignation. You said : Likewise, if I said that Christian families in the US asking for evolution not to be taught at school in the name of their faith are to be opposed, I would not be saying that all Christian families ask for evolution not to be taught or that being Christian is what explains that they want evolution not to be taught. You don't seem to understand that in this exemple, the fact that they are christian is relevant, since it is rightfully their faith that oppose the theory of evolution, and that there are organized group around christianity in the US - while for obvious historical reasons there is nothing in the Quran that talk even remotly about the shoah. But I guess teaching people who like Fourest that words matter is a lost cause. In this regard, even you drawing is stupid, because representing the french muslim famillies as a bubble, and the delinquant famillies as a small part of a collective, is factually wrong - a best representation of the "muslim families" would be a cosmos. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On January 23 2015 19:08 SoSexy wrote: WhiteDog, no. There are no contemporary christian apologists that believe that evolution is wrong - in fact it reconciles very well with the idea of creation (God created stuff, then stuff evolved). Thi is off topic but I cannot stand statements without basis Your own statement lacks a basis though | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8760 Posts
On January 23 2015 19:15 OtherWorld wrote: Your own statement lacks a basis though "god created stuff, then it evolved". yeah, that's not gonna work and how the story goes. what we don't know is what happened before the big bang, everything else is _kind of_ clear. it's still 50/50 on the big bang stuff - militant christians and/or scientists might tell you otherwise though. | ||
zatic
Zurich15366 Posts
| ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
On January 23 2015 12:02 EtherealBlade wrote: + Show Spoiler + There aren't a lot of sources for this atm. Is this real? wow If someone was really arrested for that, especially a 16 year old, we're really not in a democracy anymore in France... | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On January 23 2015 18:58 WhiteDog wrote: At this point it cannot be anything than stupidity I'm sorry. If you can understand what others write, you should stop yourself from writing the same thing other and other. Me understanding what you're writing is precisely why I'm trying to make it as simple as possible to you, because I can see you're still completely clueless about what she's saying. On January 23 2015 18:58 WhiteDog wrote: I never said that you considered the entire muslim population as a whole, I'm trying to put some senses in you. If the fact that they are muslim is not relevant to their integration problem, or to their desire to remove the shoah from history class, then why saying that they are muslim ? As I've tried to explain to you, there are thousands of other adjective that one could use to describe those population (worker class, from subsaharian africa, or from the sahel for exemple). Because the extremist preachers that she is denouncing are not targeting everybody from the working class, they're first and foremost targeting those who are already Muslims. Fourest is not making a statement about those who can't integrate in general. She is making a statement about extremist preachers and who these extremist preachers are targeting. Again (seriously, pay attention), she is not blaming those who are being targeted by the extremist preachers, and she's not even saying that these people will follow the extremist preachers, she is simply saying that the extremist preachers are targeting and trying to radicalize first and foremost those among Muslims who have trouble integrating. There is nothing in her paper that accuses Muslims, or tries to equate "having trouble integrating" to "being Muslim". Can you get this through your head already? On January 23 2015 18:58 WhiteDog wrote: She also textually said that it was "their faith" that explain their refusal from teaching the shoah - even if we are talking about a minority Factually false, she never said that. She said that those who asked for changes in the curriculum asked for those changes in the name of their faith. Like I already explained to you, that is not the same as saying, from an external point-of-view, that what explains their positions is their religion - as opposed to, for example, reactionary ideas on social or political issues that get attached to religious doctrine or ideas by specific people. Are you sure you've had any training in social sciences? You seriously can't see the difference between the two? Since when is an actor claiming it is in the name of his faith that he asks for something the same as an analyst concluding that the actor's religion is the relevant independent variable explaining the actor's position? On January 23 2015 18:58 WhiteDog wrote: , and also implied that laïcity and the republic is in danger, clearly referring to the importance of their religious faith in this regard. Actually, she explicitly says in the interview that "particularisms" should be recognized for what they are. It's not religion in itself that it is the issue (at all), it's calls for particularisms (for whatever the reason). On January 23 2015 18:58 WhiteDog wrote: The simple usage of the term muslim, to describe a population that is not entirely muslim, in a country where the muslim "community" as a whole is unorganized and almost inexistant, is an interpretation of reality and an assignation. She did not use the term Muslim "to describe a population that is not entirely Muslim". Like I've already told you countless times but as you continue to ignore for some reason, she was not referring to those who have trouble integrating in general, only to the specific group of Muslims (NOT the entire Muslim population and NOT the entire population of those having trouble integrating) who are being targeted by extremist preachers. Feel free to read my post as many times as you need until you get it. On January 23 2015 18:58 WhiteDog wrote: You said : You don't seem to understand that in this exemple, the fact that they are christian is relevant, since it is rightfully their faith that oppose the theory of evolution, and that there are organized group around christianity in the US - while for obvious historical reasons there is nothing in the Quran that talk even remotly about the shoah. But I guess teaching people who like Fourest that words matter is a lost cause. Again, Fourest is not saying that their faith is what explains their position. See above. Yeah, like the guy who 1) keeps dodging what I'm explaining to him, 2) outright distorts what Fourest is saying and 3) never actually read Fourest's words is in any position to lecture anyone that "words matter". On January 23 2015 18:58 WhiteDog wrote: In this regard, even you drawing is stupid, because representing the french muslim famillies as a bubble, and the delinquant famillies as a small part of a collective, is factually wrong - a best representation of the "muslim families" would be a cosmos. It's not factually wrong at all. If you take a category like "Muslim families", the category of "Muslim families who asked for changes in the curriculum" (not even "Muslim delinquents", so that's another distortion from your part to add to the list) is part of the larger "Muslim families" category. Just like if you took the category "TeamLiquid posters", the category "TeamLiquid posters who believe CS:GO is a way better game than anything Blizzard has ever done" would be part of that larger "TeamLiquid posters" category. It doesn't mean at all that it's representative of the larger category, obviously. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
You don't seem to have any idea about the social heterogeneity of the french muslims - but I guess reading Fourest also does that to people, and I suspect the end goal of Fourest neocon arguments is to create this muslim community. Factually false, she never said that. She said that those who asked for changes in the curriculum asked for those changes in the name of their faith. Like I already explained to you, that is not the same as saying, from an external point-of-view, that what explains their positions is their religion - as opposed to, for example, reactionary ideas on social or political issues that get attached to religious doctrine or ideas by specific people. Again you're trying to argue for something stupid. Do you know any social group or known individual that ask for the removal of the shoah teaching and argue that it is "in the name of their faith" ? So how is it a fact ? It's her interpretation, no group like that exist in today's France : this impression that a minority want the shoah removed from history class is the result of unorganized action, without any clearly identified justifications. So when she point them as "muslim" she is making a statement. It's also amazing that you don't understand what is a fact. She indeed says "their faith" : it is a fact. That you interpret those words differently do not makes it factually false. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On January 23 2015 06:00 WhiteDog wrote: Yes ridiculous. Three years ago, having the national flag was judged as extremist, and now the ministry wants us to sing the anthem at school ? There's no in between... quite a drastic change of tune indeed. france anthem is nice though the bit about muslim radicals is emphasizing radicals not muslims. it is a genuine and distinct problem that islamist radicals exist, and whatever external reading of their rationale/cause of behavior may be, they are still adherents to a particular malignant religious doctrine. the development of this particular ideology is a substantive event. | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On January 24 2015 02:12 WhiteDog wrote: So there is a teamliquid poster who happened to kill a jew down the street : how is the fact that he is a teamliquid poster relevant to the fact that he killed a jew ? None, the only reason you would insist the fact that he is a teamliquid poster is to make a link between the act and him belonging to the social group "teamliquid posters" - exactly like a police officer would insist on specific relevant caracteristics in order to identify a suspect. It's like you're deliberately not reading what I respond to you. Let me repeat: "She said that those who asked for changes in the curriculum asked for those changes in the name of their faith. Like I already explained to you, that is not the same as saying, from an external point-of-view, that what explains their positions is their religion". If a TeamLiquid poster kills someone in the street and declares "I killed him in the name of TeamLiquid forums", it would not be surprising to see it mentioned that he is a poster on TeamLiquid and what he said. But mentioning that he is a poster on TeamLiquid, or that he claimed he killed that person in the name of TeamLiquid forums is not the same as claiming that he killed someone because he is a poster on TeamLiquid. How is that not painfully obvious to you already? On January 24 2015 02:12 WhiteDog wrote: You don't seem to have any idea about the social heterogeneity of the french muslims - but I guess reading Fourest also does that to people, and I suspect the end goal of Fourest neocon arguments is to create this muslim community. I do, actually. By the way, I've still never made any statement about "French Muslims" or Muslims in general, but I guess not paying attention to what I'm writing, and not even reading the author you falsely accuse of putting forward "neocon arguments" (lmao, you truly have no clue) does that to you. On January 24 2015 02:12 WhiteDog wrote: Again you're trying to argue for something stupid. Do you know any social group or known individual that ask for the removal of the shoah teaching and argue that it is "in the name of their faith" ? So how is it a fact ? It's her interpretation, no group like that exist in today's France : this impression that a minority want the shoah removed from history class is the result of unorganized action, without any clearly identified justifications. So when she point them as "muslim" she is making a statement. See above. She was not making a statement about Muslims or Muslim families, just like she was not making a statement about Christians or Christian families. On January 24 2015 02:12 WhiteDog wrote: It's also amazing that you don't understand what is a fact. She indeed says "their faith" : it is a fact. That you interpret those words differently do not makes it factually false. I never said that she did not utter the words "their faith". The point is that she said that those who were asking for a change in curriculum said (not her) that it was in the name of their faith. She's not the one saying the Muslim or Christian faith explains why they wanted a change of curriculum. How many times am I going to have to explain this to you? | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
If a TeamLiquid poster kills someone in the street and declares "I killed him in the name of TeamLiquid forums" And do you believe famillies were actually saying "I'm against the shoah in history class in the name of my religion" or "I cannot integrate because of my religion" ? See above. She was not making a statement about Muslims or Muslim families, just like she was not making a statement about Christians or Christian families. Quoting what I said : "Do you know any social group or known individual that ask for the removal of the shoah teaching and argue that it is "in the name of their faith" ? So how is it a fact ? ". If she was not making a comment about christian or muslim, she should not suppose that they are "muslim" and that they do such things in the name of "their faith". But mentioning that he is a poster on TeamLiquid, or that he claimed he killed that person in the name of TeamLiquid forums is not the same as claiming that he killed someone because he is a poster on TeamLiquid. How is that not painfully obvious to you already? Did I say "cause" ? I implied part of them being muslim or not is irrelevant (and not factual) to them having issue integrating or issue regarding history class, so using "muslim" to qualify them is an assignation and is made with intentions to link the two. Do you understand words ? I do, actually. By the way, I've still never made any statement about "French Muslims" or Muslims in general, but I guess not paying attention to what I'm writing, and not even reading the author you falsely accuse of putting forward "neocon arguments" (lmao, you truly have no clue) does that to you. Yes you represented them as a bubble - with a defined and common space - and a minority with difficulties of integration as a small part of that bubble. Which is exactly what Fourest is doing day and night : "I'm not specifically pointing out the muslim community... but I am in reality". | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On January 24 2015 03:40 WhiteDog wrote: The hypocrisy is too strong. And do you believe famillies were actually saying "I'm against the shoah in history class in the name of my religion" or "I cannot integrate because of my religion" ? I am explaining to you why saying what she said with regards to the changes of curriculum is not the same as saying that the actual independent variable which explains why they were demanding a change of curriculum was these people's faiths, just like saying that someone declared "I killed him in the name of TeamLiquid forums" is not the same as saying that that person killed someone because he's a poster on the TeamLiquid forums. Do you understand this, yes or no? She never said that anyone could not integrate because of their religion, or that Muslims specifically could not integrate. You're still imagining things about an article you haven't even read. Go back to my posts and re-read what I thoroughly explained to you. On January 24 2015 03:40 WhiteDog wrote: I quoting what I said : "Do you know any social group or known individual that ask for the removal of the shoah teaching and argue that it is "in the name of their faith" ? So how is it a fact ? It's her interpretation, no group like that exist in today's France : this impression that a minority want the shoah removed from history class is the result of unorganized action, without any clearly identified justifications.". If she was not making a comment about christian or muslim, she should not suppose that they are "muslim" and that they do such things in the name of "their faith". See above. On January 24 2015 03:40 WhiteDog wrote: Did I say "cause" ? I implied part of them being muslim or not is irrelevant to them having issue integrating or issue regarding history class, so using "muslim" to qualify them is an assignation and is made with intentions to link the two. Do you understand words ? You are imagining things that aren't there in what she's saying, and completely mixing what she said with regards to the families asking for changes in curriculums with what she said with regards to extremist preachers trying to target those who have trouble integrating. In case of the curriculums she was only talking about a specific group of people (not the entirety of Muslims or the entirety of Christians) and reporting about what they were claiming through how they saw their faith, while in the case of those targeted by the extremist preachers she was, as I explained, not making a statement about Muslims or about people who have trouble integrating but simply pointing out how extremist preachers operate and who they target to attempt to radicalize. In neither case was there an intention from her part to link a broader group to the issues she was highlighting. By the way, thanks for giving us an example of an actual double standard, since apparently it's only an outrage to you when she mentions certain specific Muslim families but not when she mentions certain specific Christian families  | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
I am explaining to you why saying what she said with regards to the changes of curriculum is not the same as saying that the actual independent variable which explains why they were demanding a change of curriculum was these people's faiths, just like saying that someone declared "I killed him in the name of TeamLiquid forums" is not the same as saying that that person killed someone because he's a poster on the TeamLiquid forums. And you didn't answer my question. Are there muslim people or groups in France who ask for a change in the curriculum and argue that they are following their faith ? And do you think a media would explain that the killer was a poster on TL if the two informations were not related ? By the way, thanks for giving us an example of an actual double standard, since apparently it's only an outrage to you when she mentions certain specific Muslim families but not when she mentions certain specific Christian families It's not double standard. You see, I argued (and you seem to put that aside everytime) that muslim do not exist as a community in France - unlike "Christian families". One exemple : in 2004 for the law on the veil, no muslim group argued against the law - only some individuals, mainly young girls - but for the law on the gay mariage, openly christian groups and representatives were against it (just like there are openly christian famillies who argued against the "gender theory"). So christian famillies =/= muslim families, the two are really different in France social context (one exist as an institutionalized group, with an institutionalized speech, and the other do not exist institutionally - it's not even a social group if you ask me - and people like Fourest talk in their places). | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5299 Posts
her speech was purposely obfuscated to create polemics ((is what (wannabe)politicians do)) and look at you ... neither knows what she meant (not that it matters anyway because that's just how the political game works) but that doesn't stop you from assuming all kinds of shit then go at each other. +1 politics. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On January 24 2015 04:22 xM(Z wrote: you dudes are useless. her speech was purposely obfuscated to create polemics ((is what (wannabe)politicians do)) and look at you ... That's my point, he believe she is only making factual comments, because you see he believe she produced valuable work. lol | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8760 Posts
On January 24 2015 04:24 WhiteDog wrote: That's my point, he believe she is only making factual comments, because you see he believe she produced valuable work. lol then the question remains, why is xM(Z able to get the point across in one simply post and the two of you are arguing for so long :p | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
Cure vs Zoun
SHIN vs Classic
ByuN vs MaxPax
Percival vs YoungYakov
AI Arena Tournament
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Spirit vs Mixu
Clem vs TBD
RSL Revival
Serral vs Rogue
BlizzCon
IdrA vs MC
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
