• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

The Well-Mannered Politics Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Inqui

Pro Bowler
I don't remember you ever doing that but I could be wrong and I hate white supremacy just as much as you. If you don't believe religious war goes on in mainly muslim countries then so be it.
Those wars are more sectarian and they happen in a surprisingly broad part of the world - and even that ignores broader power interests where religion's just an excuse for a proxy war between big regional powers. The golden rule is to not be a minority in a lot of those parts including the Middle East, Africa and Asia (which has nothing to do with Islam because those things come from all kinds of sects. If you want to pull up a seat I can talk about how the worst offenders in recent years have quietly been Buddhists). And all of that stuff is horrible and there aren't really any true solutions that don't take generations for those countries. Twenty years ago one could have made the same claims you're making about Islam about the Irish. And look how well those complaints would have aged.

But once you've stated the fact that there's a lot of sectarian violence in a lot of poor and unstable parts of the world, the question becomes what follows that train of thought. If you're implying there's a civilisational struggle between Islam and the west then you and I are going to have a lot of problems because you're sharing company with some genuinely nasty people who've forgotten the ideas that made the west what it is today.

Islamist terrorism and white nationalist terrorism are opposite and codependent sides of the same coin. They hate each other but they need each other and they fuel each other and they have similar intrinsic motivations. The correct response from western governments to Islamist terrorism is simply surveillance and stopping as many attacks before they happen as possible so that it remains nothing more than a lethal nuisance. Even in the worst recent years for Islamist terrorism, governments had more success stories than failures and sure enough the rate of terror attacks has dwindled to near zero. Governments are waking up to white nationalist terrorism being just as big a threat and as such there'll be more resources dedicated to shutting that stuff down in the future, but from a social standpoint in western countries the big difference is that white nationalist terrorism is home-grown and is legitimised by general anti-Islamic sentiment. That's why I'm responding here in the first place - I've got no interest in repeating the shitfest that happened last time you brought up Muslims but I'm simply pointing out that the shooting didn't happen in a vacuum and even if you don't explicitly support the shooting itself it takes a critical mass of Islamophobic sentiments for these terrorists to feel like their society is under attack. Basically the message I'd have for anyone is to not treat Muslims as any kind of special case - don't assume they're more inherently violent just because of regional unrest or that their religion is a factor worth mentioning when deciding whether someone's a security threat and so on.
 

Inqui

Pro Bowler
It’s an even more crazy response to fixing the loophole when the terrorist literally explained in his manifesto that he picked a gun as his weapon because it would stoke divisions in the US and would help rally the far right

I think it’s pretty telling when your viewpoint in a debate is shared by the person who instigated the tragedy upon which the debate is based in the first place

I still mourn for all those who’ve faced unimaginable loss over the last few days and my only hope is that this tragedy won’t be meaningless and I’m encouraged by the leadership of Jacinda Ardern and the way New Zealand politics has seemed to rally around the issue of gun control but also seems to be engaging in a wider public debate about racism and white supremacy

A conversation that could fizzle out but I hope it doesn’t because it’s important
I have my share of issues with Jacinda as PM but her response to this has been terrific.

On the one hand I'm cynical about the conversation fizzling out because there have already been cases of Muslims getting yelled at and spat at in the street. All that stems from the fear of the "other" that I alluded to above and I don't feel like that will go away any time soon. But there are plenty of people who don't accost Muslims in the street or agree with internment camps or deportations that have more underlying fears and they would have come together to condemn white nationalism and made the "this is not us" declarations but it won't be long before it's back to square one and people treating Muslim immigration (for example) as a genuine concern where they wouldn't for Buddhist immigration.

But on the other hand I've also seen a degree of connectedness and that seems to be happening a lot after terrorist incidents regardless of stripe. A lot of Muslims came together to condemn the UK attacks a few years ago (and I'm assuming they did for similar attacks in Germany and elsewhere) and show support for the victims and there's been a lot of people of different faiths (and no faiths) coming together to condemn fear and hatred and support each other (the Pittsburgh synagogue did a fundraising drive for the victims here, for example) and that too will only continue as greater integration happens and people get to know each other better. It's no coincidence that in my experience the only people who fear Muslims are people who don't know any Muslims themselves or know much about how Islam is practiced in the west.
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
I have my share of issues with Jacinda as PM but her response to this has been terrific.

On the one hand I'm cynical about the conversation fizzling out because there have already been cases of Muslims getting yelled at and spat at in the street. All that stems from the fear of the "other" that I alluded to above and I don't feel like that will go away any time soon. But there are plenty of people who don't accost Muslims in the street or agree with internment camps or deportations that have more underlying fears and they would have come together to condemn white nationalism and made the "this is not us" declarations but it won't be long before it's back to square one and people treating Muslim immigration (for example) as a genuine concern where they wouldn't for Buddhist immigration.

But on the other hand I've also seen a degree of connectedness and that seems to be happening a lot after terrorist incidents regardless of stripe. A lot of Muslims came together to condemn the UK attacks a few years ago (and I'm assuming they did for similar attacks in Germany and elsewhere) and show support for the victims and there's been a lot of people of different faiths (and no faiths) coming together to condemn fear and hatred and support each other (the Pittsburgh synagogue did a fundraising drive for the victims here, for example) and that too will only continue as greater integration happens and people get to know each other better. It's no coincidence that in my experience the only people who fear Muslims are people who don't know any Muslims themselves or know much about how Islam is practiced in the west.

i think one of the reasons i have been impressed by Jacinda is by the way she has foregrounded victims and survivors and has explicitly talked about how she doesnt want to give publicity and coverage to the terrorists which is often where media and politicians go wrong because at its heart terrorism is exacerbated and is made more effective by extreme coverage - and is made more attractive as a concept by the celebrity that these killers receive from the media - so often you find links between mass shooters/terrorists etc. even to the extent that they are explicitly inspired by them

and most of that is driven by the way media covers these incidents so i was really grateful for the way Jacinda Ardern reacted and made it clear how these attacks should be portrayed and who they should centre

you can attack the issues that cause an incident without giving prominence to the perpetrator(s) where possible
 

52520Andrew

Pro Bowler
Hating terrorism by white supremacists and hating terrorism by Muslims are not mutually exclusive decisions as much as some media outlets like to pretend they are. They both can and SHOULD be hated.

Also can I just rag on the lack of media coverage about Mozambique with Idai? I am starting to think that the only thing that gets clicks these days are controversial content. I wonder if this has anying to do with how polarized things are
 

Willbacker

Ravens Ring of Honor
Those wars are more sectarian and they happen in a surprisingly broad part of the world - and even that ignores broader power interests where religion's just an excuse for a proxy war between big regional powers. The golden rule is to not be a minority in a lot of those parts including the Middle East, Africa and Asia (which has nothing to do with Islam because those things come from all kinds of sects. If you want to pull up a seat I can talk about how the worst offenders in recent years have quietly been Buddhists). And all of that stuff is horrible and there aren't really any true solutions that don't take generations for those countries. Twenty years ago one could have made the same claims you're making about Islam about the Irish. And look how well those complaints would have aged.

But once you've stated the fact that there's a lot of sectarian violence in a lot of poor and unstable parts of the world, the question becomes what follows that train of thought. If you're implying there's a civilisational struggle between Islam and the west then you and I are going to have a lot of problems because you're sharing company with some genuinely nasty people who've forgotten the ideas that made the west what it is today.

Islamist terrorism and white nationalist terrorism are opposite and codependent sides of the same coin. They hate each other but they need each other and they fuel each other and they have similar intrinsic motivations. The correct response from western governments to Islamist terrorism is simply surveillance and stopping as many attacks before they happen as possible so that it remains nothing more than a lethal nuisance. Even in the worst recent years for Islamist terrorism, governments had more success stories than failures and sure enough the rate of terror attacks has dwindled to near zero. Governments are waking up to white nationalist terrorism being just as big a threat and as such there'll be more resources dedicated to shutting that stuff down in the future, but from a social standpoint in western countries the big difference is that white nationalist terrorism is home-grown and is legitimised by general anti-Islamic sentiment. That's why I'm responding here in the first place - I've got no interest in repeating the shitfest that happened last time you brought up Muslims but I'm simply pointing out that the shooting didn't happen in a vacuum and even if you don't explicitly support the shooting itself it takes a critical mass of Islamophobic sentiments for these terrorists to feel like their society is under attack. Basically the message I'd have for anyone is to not treat Muslims as any kind of special case - don't assume they're more inherently violent just because of regional unrest or that their religion is a factor worth mentioning when deciding whether someone's a security threat and so on.

Well at least we agree on Islamist terrorism and white supremacy are equally just as bad but I probally differ from you is that I believe Islamist terrorism is much broader in scale. Another thing I cant agree with you on is that we should just accept that a terror attack can happen and we should just deal with it as it happens and learn to accept it as being normal. It needs to be more aggressive than simple surveillance and this also includes any forms of white supremacy or any type of hate for that matter.

You also have to understand as a Christian when I see/hear fellow Christians getting slaughtered on a consistent basis just cuz of their beliefs it probally strikes me a little harder than it does you since I'm not sure if you are a believer. I don't mind Muslims that have no problems with Christians and yes I do know a couple from what I do for a living that seem like self righteus guys that I have great convos with and I have respect since they always there on the job working. What gets my goat tho is we now have 2 Muslim congresswomen that have openly expressed hatred towards other religions and it makes me wonder what the underlying factors are of what they truly believe.

Look what the bottomline is is that if they want to come to western civilization and blend in with the culture that is already here that's great but to me their countries also have to be more accepting. Just the way it is with me. I don't want to hear chants of "Death to America" or "Death to Israel" and until this stops I'll always be skeptical.
 

Willbacker

Ravens Ring of Honor
Hating terrorism by white supremacists and hating terrorism by Muslims are not mutually exclusive decisions as much as some media outlets like to pretend they are. They both can and SHOULD be hated.

Also can I just rag on the lack of media coverage about Mozambique with Idai? I am starting to think that the only thing that gets clicks these days are controversial content. I wonder if this has anying to do with how polarized things are

Yes you can rag on it lol since I didn't hear anything about it. Not good news since I did read the article you posted on Everything Science. I guess its in reverse in the Southern hemisphere and it must be cyclone season. My best wishes to them.
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
What gets my goat tho is we now have 2 Muslim congresswomen that have openly expressed hatred towards other religions and it makes me wonder what the underlying factors are of what they truly believe.

incorrect - assuming you're referring to omar and tlaib?
neither have expressed hatred towards any religions - both have been very clear in their viewpoints as being anti-zionist but not anti-semitic

Look what the bottomline is is that if they want to come to western civilization and blend in with the culture that is already here that's great but to me their countries also have to be more accepting. Just the way it is with me. I don't want to hear chants of "Death to America" or "Death to Israel" and until this stops I'll always be skeptical.

eh? you're assuming muslims aren't citizens of the countries they are in? because most muslims arent coming into "western civilization", they are already here and have been for more than a generation - and on top of that things like modern mathematics etc. have a basis in the Islamic world - things that "westerners" have always naively assumed have been borne out of predominantly white societies

not sure where you're hearing these death to america or death to israel chants either...

Another thing I cant agree with you on is that we should just accept that a terror attack can happen and we should just deal with it as it happens and learn to accept it as being normal. It needs to be more aggressive than simple surveillance and this also includes any forms of white supremacy or any type of hate for that matter.

this is disingenuous - he's not saying we should accept terrorist attacks - he's saying that foreign terrorist attacks have been thwarted and have been far less effective in recent times (because of anti-terrorist measures and because of public awareness etc.) not that the rate at which they exist is acceptable - the point that's being made is that governments need to catch up and apply those same measures and awareness to home-grown and domestic terrorism (often of the far-right/supremacist variety - because of their nature) - terrorism is scary because it's intended to be but honestly the probability of being killed in a terrorist incident/attack are a lot lower than a lot of other possibilities/probabilities (especially in the US)

You also have to understand as a Christian when I see/hear fellow Christians getting slaughtered on a consistent basis just cuz of their beliefs it probally strikes me a little harder than it does you since I'm not sure if you are a believer.

that's entirely rational to be fearful given the trend of those attacks you highlighted but ultimately you're just emphasising his point that it takes both extremes to sustain each other - your fear (and those more extreme than you) are sustained by the fear of attacks which leads to "retaliatory"/pre-emptive attacks on Muslims and mosques which radicalises more Muslims which in turn leads to "retaliatory"/pre-emptive attacks on Christians (or predominant christian countries etc.) - the difference is the coverage that each gets - when was the last time you heard of a christian terrorist referred to as a "christian" terrorist? when was the last time you heard of a muslim terrorist not referred to as a "muslim" terrorist?

this is where media coverage becomes really problematic
 

JO_75

Hall of Famer
Dems keep losing while Trump continues to win. Only thing I know is Bernie may be the only candidate who could beat him in 2020 and even then, that's a big if.
 

52520Andrew

Pro Bowler
A lot can happen between now and 2020 and this guy lost a popular vote to one of the most hated politicians of all time. I'm going to hold off on reelection talk for now
 

52520Andrew

Pro Bowler
So the house voted 420-0 to release the Mueller report to the public and the senate today has blocked it

giphy.gif
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
I mean since Fox news is telling us how much the report exonerates Trump, there should be no issue releasing it.

that's what i was thinking lol - in fact it should be in their best interest to release it if it really does exonerate him...

it's almost like the trump appointed AG's summary might not be quite as indicative of the report's real sentiments as you might think
 

52520Andrew

Pro Bowler
that's what i was thinking lol - in fact it should be in their best interest to release it if it really does exonerate him...

it's almost like the trump appointed AG's summary might not be quite as indicative of the report's real sentiments as you might think
I mean the house voted unanimously to release it, that includes 197 republicans
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top