Boston Marathon bombings, part II

[tachosomoza]

Note from l'Enfermé: this is the new Boston Marathon thread.


Perhaps you can't get this through that thick skull of yours, but joking about homophobia is unacceptable here. Can you comprehend that?

Edit: It also wouldn't of been just for that 'word' but also for the reactionary viewpoints that you've espoused here.

Ah, I see, so you're going to ban me for not liking my hometown turned into Baghdad. I see. I'm not a reactionary, I'm level-headed and practical.

[MarxArchist]

No, but I don't want them to come where they'll be unhappy.

I don't think this was anything like a person living in Pakistan training to come kill Americans catching a plane over here with that intent. These guys grew up here. Even so, in the case of a foreign national killing Americans we should have the ability to both condemn the action while understanding the the US government manufactures enemies with economic and foreign policy. In some cases the US straight up manufactures these acts by funding them and or 'radicalizing' certain populations for their financial/geopolitical interests which has come back to bite them (and us) in the ass.

[slum]

my hometown turned into Baghdad

buddy

stop

[Fourth Internationalist]

No, but I don't want them to come where they'll be unhappy.

Wtf does being arab have to do with being happy in the US? Race does not determine happiness.

[tachosomoza]

I don't think this was anything like a person living in Pakistan training to come kill Americans catching a plane over here with that intent. These guys grew up here. Even so, in the case of a foreign national killing Americans we should have the ability to both condemn the action while understanding the the US government manufactures enemies with economic and foreign policy.

This I understand more than anyone here. Islamic fundamentalists will hate us regardless, though.

[Hexen]

I just read about a conspiracy theory on a forum (not related to politics) how it's the cops who are the real bombers and the Chechen guys are scape-goats, and the guy posted how the cops who bombed here also did the Sandy Hook:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/21311_526553574079288_395157567_n.jpg

wtf x)

Anyways, are there any finding about who did it?

Well is there any response to this? I think this might be bullshit...

[Art Vandelay]

Ah, I see, so you're going to ban me for not liking my hometown turned into Baghdad. I see. I'm not a reactionary, I'm level-headed and practical.

No, as expressed by pretty much every single person here, you have made numerous reactionary comments, it is quite clear to any radical that you're a jingoist and to top it off you've tossed around a homophobic slur and when called out on it you've responded by telling the person you've potentially offended to 'get over themselves' and me to 'chill out.'

[Fourth Internationalist]

Ah, I see, so you're going to ban me for not liking my hometown turned into Baghdad. I see. I'm not a reactionary, I'm level-headed and practical.

Ah yes. If we let the dirty sand niggers in, our white homeland will turn into Moslem Alquaida commie mexican land!

Go back to storm front!

[Art Vandelay]

Well is there any response to this? I think this might be bullshit...

It's Alex Jones type nonsense.

[tachosomoza]

No, as expressed by pretty much every single person here, you have made numerous reactionary comments, it is quite clear to any radical that you're a jingoist and to top it off you've tossed around a homophobic slur and when called out on it you've responded by telling the person you've potentially offended to 'get over themselves' and me to 'chill out.'




Jingoism is extreme patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy. [1] In practice, it is a country's advocation of the use of threats or actual force against other countries in order to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests. Colloquially, it refers to excessive bias in judging one's own country as superior to others —an extreme type of nationalism.



Yeah, no. That's not me. Also, I was just called a worm, class-traitor, enemy, and scum, which is far more offensive. Shut the fuck up.

[MarxArchist]

This I understand more than anyone here. Islamic fundamentalists will hate us regardless, though.

I wouldn't say that's a universal general rule of thumb but there is a sort of economic/culture war taking place and it has to do with the expansion of western style consumerism into their culture. This is being done so as to keep profits expanding. A lot of potential McDonald's customers in the Middle East. The US says they're "spreading democracy" but it's really classic market expansion. They're resisting it at home and they're bringing the fight to what they see is the source and the US is indeed the source but nothing will be accomplished by blowing up innocent people BUT the US government is doing just that on a daily, weekly, yearly basis as the foundation of this "democracy" they're spreading. Of course MANY people around the globe hate America and rightly so. Does this mean I condone murdering innocent people? No.

[tachosomoza]

Ah yes. If we let the dirty sand niggers in, our white homeland will turn into Moslem Alquaida commie mexican land!

Go back to storm front!

Black jews aren't exactly welcome on there.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Black jews aren't exactly welcome on there.

Actually, if you support separating the races, they are actually quite welcoming whether or not youre white.

[tachosomoza]

Actually, if you support separating the races, they are actually quite welcoming whether or not youre white.

Yeah, I don't support the concept of race or separation of them.

[Akshay!]

Look, tachosomoza, to me your whole attitude about this incident seems totally contrary to how genuine revolutionary socialists ought to think. We must never be associated with nationalism, jingoism, anti-Arab racism, homophobia and other nonsensical attitudes. Never! Instead, as someone already mentioned, we should analyze the situation in a materialist way and try to explain why, for example, the Chechen guy acted in a certain way.

Obviously, most of us don't agree with his methods, but we don't join the media in saying "USA is the best. Why do these Arabs come here in Our country? Look how they treat their women. They hate our freedoms. They hate us."

That's foolish and childlike.

I would advise you to read some books on Marxism and History and try to understand the roots of "Islamic fundamentalism" (in a materialist way). Also, as I've been repeatedly saying, you completely ignore the much larger crime - US State Terrorism - which kills incomparably more people everyday than any "terrorist" can ever kill, which in turn increases "terrorism". Your arguments seems to be taken straight out of Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and the like. Probably you've seen a lot of media during this incident, or influenced by the patriotic crowd. I don't know what's the reason, but your statements are not what any socialist would want to be associated with.

[Art Vandelay]

Yeah, no. That's not me. Also, I was just called a worm, class-traitor, enemy, and scum, which is far more offensive. Shut the fuck up.

Quit acting like a petulant child. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the fact that literally everyone on here disagrees with you, on a revolutionary leftist forum, that perhaps it has something do with the fact that some of the comments you've made (which even you've admitted sounded a tad nationalistic) are reactionary?

Also no, being called those things, are not the equivalent then a 'communist' (and trust me, I use that term lightly) going around hurling homophobic insults and supporting their usage after being called out for it.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Yeah, I don't support the concept of race or separation of them.

Then what's with your anti-Arab posts? Do you have a multi-personality?

[tachosomoza]

Then what's with your anti-Arab posts? Do you have a multi-personality?

Since you want to talk about Arabs, what do you think about their involvement in the African slave trade for hundreds of years before Europeans, and their mistreatment of migrant workers?

I'm not racist against Arabs, but they aren't saints.

[bcbm]

Well is there any response to this? I think this might be bullshit...

obviously its bullshit

[Art Vandelay]

Since you want to talk about Arabs, what do you think about their involvement in the African slave trade for hundreds of years before Europeans, and their mistreatment of migrant workers?

I'm not racist against Arabs, but they aren't saints.

:blink:

And this is relevant to the thread how? Just keep digging that grave kid.

[tachosomoza]

Quit acting like a petulant child. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the fact that literally everyone on here disagrees with you, on a revolutionary leftist forum, that perhaps it has something do with the fact that some of the comments you've made (which even you've admitted sounded a tad nationalistic) are reactionary?

Also no, being called those things, are not the equivalent then a 'communist' (and trust me, I use that term lightly) going around hurling homophobic insults and supporting their usage after being called out for it.

I'll give you that I've been personally affected by this incident and that may have lead me to say things that others would construe as "reactionary", but you'd get the same response if you asked anybody who knows people that are scarred for life because of this, regardless of political affiliation. I'm not a reactionary, nor am I against Chechens or anybody else. To anybody that I've "offended", I'm sorry.

[GPDP]

tachosomoza, buddy, I think it's best that you step away from this site for a couple of days, calm down, think things through, and come back when you are more level-headed. Emotions have surely got the best of you, as you have admitted elsewhere. However, the comments you have made in this thread are troubling, and even though high emotions when shit gets personal often brings out the worst in us, it is telling that in your case, the "worst in you" manifested in a number of reactionary statements. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this may not be stuff you would normally think or say under everyday circumstances, but seeing this kind of chauvinistic bile come from you suggests to everyone in this forum that some of it does indeed exist within you still.

So as I suggested, step back for a while, let things simmer down, then read back over your comments and really, critically assess whether you truly believe the things you have said are positions a socialist should endorse.

[tachosomoza]

I guarantee that all of you would feel the same way I do in this situation if you were affected by it. Also, if an American Christian went to Chechnya and did this, you'd have radically different views.

[Art Vandelay]

I guarantee that all of you would feel the same way I do in this situation if you were affected by it.

While I don't pretend to speak for everyone else, I will answer this for myself. No, I wouldn't. Mainly due to the fact, over the past three or so years, I've underwent a personal campaign to purge all sentiments of bourgeois ideology within me, which is an ever on going and perhaps even impossible task. That being said, I'm a strict materialist and wouldn't espouse the chauvinistic nonsense you have here, in any circumstances.

[MarxArchist]

I guarantee that all of you would feel the same way I do in this situation if you were affected by it.
Marxists who live in NY 2001 weren't saying the things you're saying. We can dig up some posts, blogs and articles if you like and in that attack thousands died. There was a wave of nationalism in the wake of 9/11 though- something socialists condemned. This nationalism made it possible for Iraq to be attacked, Africa to be attacked, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria etc.

[Art Vandelay]

Also, if an American Christian went to Chechnya and did this, you'd have radically different views.

No, we wouldn't, since were Marxists our ability to analyze a situation isn't tainted by nationalities. For your own sake take GPDP's advice.

[tachosomoza]

Marxists who live in NY 2001 weren't saying the things you're saying. We can dig up some posts, blogs and articles if you like and in that attack thousands died. There was a wave of nationalism in the wake of 9/11 though- something socialists condemned. This nationalism made it possible for Iraq to be attacked, Africa to be attacked, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria etc.

Yeah, I wouldn't support an attack on Chechnya or Dagestan over this.

[MarxArchist]

Yeah, I wouldn't support an attack on Chechnya or Dagestan over this.
Perhaps not but this "they come to our country and don't appreciate our opportunities" stuff is the sort of nationalism that made it possible for Bush to invade Iraq and on and on. It's what makes it possible for Obama to expand on Bush's war time policies.

6pfcW0_sSuw

[Paul Pott]

Oh fuck me it's September 2001 again.

[tachosomoza]

Meh, it's all narishkeit, I really don't want to pull us apart over this. Have a picture fellas.

http://i.imgur.com/p73DeeJ.png

[MarxArchist]

Oh fuck me it's September 2001 again.
Not really no. There's a huge difference in the nature of the two attacks. Only reason I bring it up is to highlight the consequences of nationallism.

[tachosomoza]

Also, they've got the little puke in the same hospital as some of his victims, Beth Israel....I'd be scared shitless.

[slum]

miraculously guy you are not the only person who has been effected by this so don't act like you speak for everyone who lives here.

especially since you dont, you know

live here.

[tachosomoza]

miraculously guy you are not the only person who has been effected by this so don't act like you speak for everyone who lives here.

especially since you dont, you know

live here.

Your post hurts my eyes.

Also, I don't speak for everyone, but I guarantee you more people would agree with me than with you.

[Paul Pott]

Not really no. There's a huge difference in the nature of the two attacks. Only reason I bring it up is to highlight the consequences of nationallism.

I don't mean the attacks, I mean the bullshit that came afterward.

[slum]

Your post hurts my eyes.

Also, I don't speak for everyone, but I guarantee you more people would agree with me than with you.

and that would matter why, exactly? we're not talking about most people, we're talking about revolutionary leftists.

seriously turn off cnn's tearful retelling of this Monstrous Act of Jihad Done by A Monster and come visit if you like. what i see is a lot of people trying to nip this sort of nationalist garbage in the bud

ETA:
and your boat picture isnt funny

[tachosomoza]

and that would matter why, exactly? we're not talking about most people, we're talking about revolutionary leftists.

seriously turn off cnn's tearful retelling of this Monstrous Act of Jihad Done by A Monster and come visit if you like. what i see is a lot of people trying to nip this sort of nationalist garbage in the bud

Revolutionary leftists aren't the only people who matter, you elitist fuck. See, this is why we remain marginalized, we sequester ourselves away from the people and look down on them. You can't do that.

[slum]

Revolutionary leftists aren't the only people who matter, you elitist fuck.

so we should accept bourgeois ideology because many people adhere to it?

and plenty of not-revolutionary-leftists are also taking this as an opportunity to show some compassion towards their fellow man, but they aren't on this forum. i'm not telling you to not be upset, i'm saying to harp over and over on the immigrant thing is not exactly in line with the views people on this site claim they hold.

[tachosomoza]

so we should accept bourgeois ideology because many people adhere to it?

and plenty of not-revolutionary-leftists are also taking this as an opportunity to show some compassion towards their fellow man, but they aren't on this forum. i'm not telling you to not be upset, i'm saying to harp over and over on the immigrant thing is not exactly in line with the views people on this site claim they hold.

Yeah, I'm not harping on all immigrants, just those that would come to cause harm and bring their reactionary hatreds with them. I have compassion, I feel sorry for the Chechens and others who will suffer unjust backlash because of these actions.

[Paul Pott]

Tachosomoza, you seriously need to calm the fuck down and stop acting like you'll still care in a year.

[tachosomoza]

I want to know who the fuck this is thanking every one of my posts.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Police square off against alleged Chechen Muslim terrorists:

Chechens allegedly kill two people and wound many, as well as killing a cop:
Americans are horrified.
Cops kill hundreds every year, and one alleged Chechen terrorist:
Americans celebrate their bravery.

Conclusion: Terrorists would be better served in their aim of killing Americans by becoming police officers than by random bombings. Further, they could expect to garner the widespread support for said killings that their current tactics fail to elicit.

[Paul Pott]

I also like how there is a bigger reaction to this than to Sandy Hook, where more people died, and small children at that.

[GPDP]

Your post hurts my eyes.

Also, I don't speak for everyone, but I guarantee you more people would agree with me than with you.

And that's supposed to make such a mindset correct?

You're letting your anger and borderline bloodlust get in the way of looking at the situation in a rational manner. I'm sure most people here wanted to see Anders Breivik burning at the stake at some base level, but many of us were content to see him contained away from civil society, because as socialists, we're above stooping down to their level.

[slum]

uh no actually, i dont 'look down on people'. i've been out in my neighborhood and city these last few days at vigils and gatherings as have other comrades who are trying to fight the racism and anti-islam sentiment that this has stirred up in people.

i sure am glad you'll "feel sorry" for muslims and chechens (or percieved muslims or chechens) who will suffer backlash, especially since you're spouting the kind of rhetoric that prompts that backlash

whatever i gotta go see a friend who has actually been afraid to leave her house since she wears hijab

[Art Vandelay]

I want to know who the fuck this is thanking every one of my posts.

Dodger is a Marxist-Leninist who funnily enough was restricted for anti-immigrant views.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I also like how there is a bigger reaction to this than to Sandy Hook, where more people died, and small children at that.

But... but the people who did this are Moslem and foreign-ish!

[tachosomoza]

Dodger is a Marxist-Leninist who funnily enough was restricted for anti-immigrant views.

Heh.

Ok, asshole, don't thank me anymore.

[Art Vandelay]

Dodger is actually one of the coolest old chaps on the board, his posts were always entertaining.

Once again quit conducting yourself like a petulant child.

[tachosomoza]

Dodger is actually one of the coolest old chaps on the board, his posts were always entertaining.

Once again quit conducting yourself like a petulant child.

The only petulant children here are the ones jumping all over me because I hurt their feelings. Seriously, we are not winning over the working class by behaving like you.

[MarxArchist]

The only petulant children here are the ones jumping all over me because I hurt their feelings. Seriously, we are not winning over the working class by behaving like you.

Instead we should take to the streets waving American flags condemning the immigrant invasion! Why didn't I think of that? Tachosomoza shows us the way!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CzsBMcARnmA/ULmQ33uQNPI/AAAAAAAAASo/fiV0h9s-wEs/s1600/nationalism1.jpg

[Art Vandelay]

The only petulant children here are the ones jumping all over me because I hurt their feelings. Seriously, we are not winning over the working class by behaving like you.

Are you even apart of an active organization. If you are, let me know so I can avoid them. Any party that's allows in chauvinistic homophobes isn't doing much as far as 'winning over the working class.'

[Ele'ill]

The only petulant children here are the ones jumping all over me because I hurt their feelings. Seriously, we are not winning over the working class by behaving like you.

not 'we' because I find your entire line of argument/discussion to be either incoherent or vividly not left depending on which part of the 500 post thread we look at

[tachosomoza]

Are you even apart of an active organization. If you are, let me know so I can avoid them. Any party that's allows in chauvinistic homophobes isn't doing much as far as 'winning over the working class.'

I'm not a chauvinistic homophobe, I'm a bisexual fucking black jew, clown.

Either way, I'm done with this madness, I've said enough and taken enough vitriol for the day.

[Art Vandelay]

I'm not a chauvinistic homophobe, I'm a bisexual fucking black jew, clown.

You have clearly demonstrated your chauvinistic sentiments in this thread. The fact that I called you a homophobe was because admitted to using a homophobic slur and stood by its usage when called out for it.

[Luís Henrique]

I think this thread should be for information about the Boston bombing and its aftermath, not about tachosomoza's views.

If we are going to derail the thread, then could we do it with more in-depth analysis of Chechnya, Chechen separatism, American police and legal response to acts of terrorism, etc.?

tachosomoza, you may wish to calm down and rethink the way and content of your posts in this thread.

Other people, it is time to stop ganging on him. He is wrong, he is not the first person to be wrong in this forum, nor he is going to be the last one. Get a sense of proportion; it is cheap and comes with a nice, free grip enclosed.

Luís Henrique

[tachosomoza]

Stand me up against the wall and shoot me for a heated slip of the fingers that I would never say in real life, why don't you?

Yeah, let's get some actual news.

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/20/17832252-whats-next-the-interrogation-of-the-boston-bombing-suspect?lit





An indication of the complex investigation ahead came Friday night, when an Obama administration official told NBC News that Tsarnaev would not be given a Miranda warning when he is physically able to be interrogated after receiving medical treatment.

Instead, the official said, the government will invoke a legal rule known as the "public safety exception," which will enable investigators to question Tsarnaev without first advising him of his right to remain silent and to be afforded legal counsel.

The exemption can be invoked when information is needed to protect public safety. In this instance, the government believes it's vital to find out if Tsarnaev planted any other explosives before his capture or whether others might have plotted with him to do so, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Tsarnaev’s older brother, Tamerlan, was killed in a shootout with police early Friday, and it was not clear until late Friday that authorities would be able to question their remaining prime suspect.

Until shortly before his capture around 8:45 p.m. ET, the wounded and bleeding Tsarnaev exchanged gunfire with authorities in Watertown, Mass., while sheltering in a plastic-wrapped pleasure boat.

Officers on the scene and the brass in the command center were both clearly elated by the outcome.

“We always want to take someone alive so we can find out what happened,” Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis said at a media briefing an hour later, “and we can hold them to justice."



This kid will never see the outside of custody again.

[Luís Henrique]

“We always want to take someone alive so we can find out what happened,” Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis said at a media briefing an hour later, “and we can hold them to justice."

Good.

It's a shame that American police corps haven't stood up for such attitude too much as of recently (Dorner, remember?)

Luís Henrique

[tachosomoza]

Good.

It's a shame that American police corps haven't stood up for such attitude too much as of recently (Dorner, remember?)

Luís Henrique

Dorner was entirely different. He was a man full grown with an arsenal of weapons, a righteous complaint about racism and institutionalized racism in the LAPD, and a will to not be taken alive. Tsarnaev is a 19 year old boy under the thumb of his elder brother who probably didn't understand half of his rhetoric, just went along with it.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Why do people on here seem to be more interested in saying its wrong to jump to conclusions about this being Muslims, while themselves jumping to the conclusion it is militia patriot style group, than they are about the fact innocent people died because two fuckwits decided that their stupid theology is ok with blowing non combatants up?

Shit like this is always fucked up and enough to bring someone to tears. Whether it is some poor kids in Afghanistan or a white eight year old in Boston. Stop trying to come up with an angle or some edgy thing to say about foreign policy and just say wow, these people were ****s, this is terrible. All killing of innocent people is horrific.

Also the idea of islamophobia is ridiculous. Is being against christian violence in Africa Christinophobic? Is being against fascism fascismophobic?

Despite what some white liberals may tell you Islam is not a fucking race, it is a theology, it is not something you are born with like skin color or red hair. For those who say well you are if your family are Muslims, well my family were all homophobic and I like boys so no, it is a choice. It is not a religion of peace, all religions are full of disgusting shit and should be opposed.

Unless you hate people like me, or women, or kids who answer back, or think slavery is OK as long as you ain't coveting other peoples.

[Deity]

Too bad the damn right wing wants him treated as an "enemy combatant" and not a US citizen.
-See john McCain and Lindsay Graham

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Too bad the damn right wing wants him treated as an "enemy combatant" and not a US citizen.
-See john McCain and Lindsay Graham

So America should be able to snatch foreign people up and kill them without trial but not people with citizenship?

I never get why people against the constitutional democracy, which I say in air quotes, support the upholding of it within a bourgeois framework.

[Comrade Nasser]

Note from l'Enfermé: this is the new Boston Marathon thread.



Ah, I see, so you're going to ban me for not liking my hometown turned into Baghdad. I see. I'm not a reactionary, I'm level-headed and practical.

Baghdad? I'm an Arab person. I thought we were friends I can't believe you would say that lmao.

Somewhat on-topic today some white guy in his pickup with about 4 friends drove by me on the sidewalk and yelled something along the lines of "Go back to Chechnya muslim!". That was fun.

Also, in the other thread I saw someone refer to Chechens as Arabs. They aren't Arabs although it's a common misconception.

[tachosomoza]

Baghdad? I'm an Arab person. I thought we were friends.

We are.



Somewhat on-topic today some white guy in his pickup with about 4 friends drove by me on the sidewalk and yelled something along the lines of "Go back to Chechnya dune coon!". That was fun.

Also, in the other thread I saw someone refer to Chechens as Arabs. They aren't Arabs although it's a common misconception.

Fuck him.

[Comrade Nasser]

We are.



Fuck him.

I still like you Tachosomoza even though I don't agree with everything you said.

[RadioRaheem84]

Why do people on here seem to be more interested in saying its wrong to jump to conclusions about this being Muslims, while themselves jumping to the conclusion it is militia patriot style group, than they are about the fact innocent people died because two fuckwits decided that their stupid theology is ok with blowing non combatants up?

Shit like this is always fucked up and enough to bring someone to tears. Whether it is some poor kids in Afghanistan or a white eight year old in Boston. Stop trying to come up with an angle or some edgy thing to say about foreign policy and just say wow, these people were ****s, this is terrible. All killing of innocent people is horrific.

Also the idea of islamophobia is ridiculous. Is being against christian violence in Africa Christinophobic? Is being against fascism fascismophobic?

Despite what some white liberals may tell you Islam is not a fucking race, it is a theology, it is not something you are born with like skin color or red hair. For those who say well you are if your family are Muslims, well my family were all homophobic and I like boys so no, it is a choice. It is not a religion of peace, all religions are full of disgusting shit and should be opposed.

Unless you hate people like me, or women, or kids who answer back, or think slavery is OK as long as you ain't coveting other peoples.

God, is this what passes for being level headed these days? Fuck all analysis and accept that these were two fuckwits? I think people can clearly get past that notion in two seconds, we do not need a self righteous lecture on how to shut up and be patriotic by sticking to hate.

The more level headed thing to do is to analyze why this shit is happening in the first place to help make sure it doesn't happen again. How people feel better about dumping all analysis in favor of sheer brute hate thinks it somehow honors the dead more is beyond me.

We know Islam is not a race. We're not treating it as such. We are discussing it as it being used as a scapegoat for xenophobic violence by those who think Islam = dark skinned brown people.

Religious ideology wasn't the root cause. If you weren't caught up in self righteous indignation you would understand or try to understand that their grievances (terrorists) are largely political (as they always are), based in conditions that can be explained without religious interpretation. These terrorists merely couch their rhetoric in religious language.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

God, is this what passes for being level headed these days? Fuck all analysis and accept that these were two fuckwits? I think people can clearly get passed that notion in two seconds, we do not need a self righteous lecture on how to shut up and be patriotic by sticking to hate.

The more level headed thing to do is to analyze why this shit is happening in the first place to help make sure it doesn't happen again. How people feel better about dumping all analysis in favor of sheer brute hate thinks it somehow honors the dead more is beyond me.

We know Islam is not a race. We're not treating it as such. We are discussing it as it being used as a scapegoat for xenophobic violence by those who think Islam = dark skinned brown people.

Religious ideology wasn't the root cause. If you weren't caught up in self righteous indignation you would understand or try to understand that their grievances (terrorists) are largely political (as they always are), based in conditions that can be explained without religious interpretation. These terrorists merely couch their rhetoric in religious language.

Two muslims blow up an eight year old and it is wrong to say anything about islam in the broader context and we should focus on combatting what is in your perception islamophobic xenophobia. Give me a break.

Yes I do have a phobia of Muslims, because ya know, they string people like me up for existing. Go take your liberal bullshit and patronize someone else.
Also I am not from America, stop building straw men, in fact, just have some integrity in your argument.

Why do you feel xenophobic violence is an issue to combat, which it is, but not see Muslims blowing people up as an issue that needs addressing.

Yes I know white people blow Muslims up in wars for profit, that does not negate a problem with people using theology in a war against people who dare not to believe in their shitty old book. hey Allah you fukk, I like big black men and I like being a freak, fuck you.

[Comrade Nasser]

Tachosomoza, I know I'm not really one to judge as sometimes I post stupid shit on the forum without thinking/getting off-topic, but you shouldn't have said the anti-gay slur.

[RadioRaheem84]

Two muslims blow up an eight year old and it is wrong to say anything about islam in the broader context and we should focus on combatting what is in your perception islamophobic xenophobia. Give me a break.

Yes I do have a phobia of Muslims, because ya know, they string people like me up for existing. Go take your liberal bullshit and patronize someone else.
Also I am not from America, stop building straw men, in fact, just have some integrity in your argument.

Why do you feel xenophobic violence is an issue to combat, which it is, but not see Muslims blowing people up as an issue that needs addressing.

Yes I know white people blow Muslims up in wars for profit, that does not negate a problem with people using theology in a war against people who dare not to believe in their shitty old book. hey Allah you fukk, I like big black men and I like being a freak, fuck you.

You could smell reactionary on his first post. Someone ban this troll.

Xenophobic violence is real and deadly, as real and deadly as terrorists blowing people up in the name of Islam. Wars are started over both.

The way you analyze and address the situation is not resort to Sam Harris/Hitchens style blowhard anti-theism.

Terrorism whether from the State, reactionary white groups, Islamic terrorists or even left wing guerrillas are all political acts, not religious.

[tachosomoza]

God, is this what passes for being level headed these days? Fuck all analysis and accept that these were two fuckwits? I think people can clearly get past that notion in two seconds, we do not need a self righteous lecture on how to shut up and be patriotic by sticking to hate.

The more level headed thing to do is to analyze why this shit is happening in the first place to help make sure it doesn't happen again. How people feel better about dumping all analysis in favor of sheer brute hate thinks it somehow honors the dead more is beyond me.

Religious ideology wasn't the root cause. If you weren't caught up in self righteous indignation you would understand or try to understand that their grievances (terrorists) are largely political (as they always are), based in conditions that can be explained without religious interpretation. These terrorists merely couch their rhetoric in religious language.

Yes, it was. The older brother was a fan of a radical Australian imam, and had been radicalising rapidly, according to his uncles. Nobody is hating anyone, but trying to deny the true cause of an attack because you want to avoided offending followers a religion is foolhardy. These brothers were religious extremists and terrorists, they weren't striking back against oppression or racism or trying to make a political statement.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

You could smell reactionary on his first post. Someone ban this troll.

Xenophobic violence is real and deadly, as real and deadly as terrorists blowing people up in the name of Islam. Wars are started over both.

The way you analyze and address the situation is not resort to Sam Harris/Hitchens style blowhard anti-theism.

Terrorism whether from the State, reactionary white groups, Islamic terrorists or even left wing guerrillas are all political acts, not religious.

Someone disagrees, quick if you don't ban it might challenge his self erected political ghetto. Statist wants to force an anarchist to shut up. Its actually quite cute.

[tachosomoza]

Two muslims blow up an eight year old and it is wrong to say anything about islam in the broader context and we should focus on combatting what is in your perception islamophobic xenophobia. Give me a break.

Yes I do have a phobia of Muslims, because ya know, they string people like me up for existing. Go take your liberal bullshit and patronize someone else.
Also I am not from America, stop building straw men, in fact, just have some integrity in your argument.

Why do you feel xenophobic violence is an issue to combat, which it is, but not see Muslims blowing people up as an issue that needs addressing.

Yes I know white people blow Muslims up in wars for profit, that does not negate a problem with people using theology in a war against people who dare not to believe in their shitty old book. hey Allah you fukk, I like big black men and I like being a freak, fuck you.

No, they don't. However, people like you used to string people like me up for existing. Fuck off.

Xenophobic violence and slandering a broad and diverse group of people is not what we should be doing. Two bad apples don't spoil the whole bunch.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Yes, it was. The older brother was a fan of a radical Australian imam, and had been radicalising rapidly, according to his uncles. Nobody is hating anyone, but trying to deny the true cause of an attack because you want to avoided offending followers a religion is foolhardy. These brothers were religious extremists and terrorists, they weren't striking back against oppression or racism or trying to make a political statement.

It is not fool hardy, it is almost violent in its deceit. It is openly abandoning human rights issues of atheists, gays and women because of a shitty political agenda.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

No, they don't. However, people like you used to string people like me up for existing. Fuck off.

Xenophobic violence and slandering a broad and diverse group of people is not what we should be doing. Two bad apples don't spoil the whole bunch.

If you are muslim and you don't want to kill me, you are cherry picking the shit book you used to read

When did queer Anarchists string people like you up? can you name one time? I can remember Muslims hanging queer people for being queer pretty fucking recently.

[Deity]

So America should be able to snatch foreign people up and kill them without trial but not people with citizenship?

I never get why people against the constitutional democracy, which I say in air quotes, support the upholding of it within a bourgeois framework.

I never said I agree with that treatment under any circumstances, however I was regarding a specific event in which a US citizen is going to be stripped of his rights.

I don't believe anybody should be treated in an inhumane way whether american citizens or not. Unfortunately the United States government believes only our citizens deserve rights, and clearly even in this situation only when it suits them.

[RadioRaheem84]

It is not fool hardy, it is almost violent in its deceit. It is openly abandoning human rights issues of atheists, gays and women because of a shitty political agenda.
.


Then you're not an anarchist or in anyway a leftist. This isn't about conditions of poverty but literally about conditions in which imperialism and capitalism have an affect on people. There are people who believe in dogmatic things all the time, Christians and Jews do too but it's a holdover from the past, their actions when they take it to the streets and wage war is political, not religious. They want to change laws in favor of their religion because they believe it will create stability or attack a power they feel is causing instability. That is a political cause and movement. Religion has no real material bearing on it because if you thought like a materialist, which most anarchists are, then you would know that religion is merely the result of people's material conditions. People do not have to be rich, poor or in between to know the world is fucked up and thus turn to religion for a sense of peace and guidance, especially in a capitalist world which offers only callous cash payment as the nexus between men.

Religion, is a side effect of the reigning system, not the cause of it.

Learn something before you go around acting all brash.

[tachosomoza]

If you are muslim and you don't want to kill me, you are cherry picking the shit book you used to read

When did queer Anarchists string people like you up? can you name one time?

Yeah, ban this guy. And you guys thought I was the fucking troll. :lol:

[Deity]

Yes, it was. The older brother was a fan of a radical Australian imam, and had been radicalising rapidly, according to his uncles. Nobody is hating anyone, but trying to deny the true cause of an attack because you want to avoided offending followers a religion is foolhardy. These brothers were religious extremists and terrorists, they weren't striking back against oppression or racism or trying to make a political statement.

Both brothers? Because I'm fairly certain after scrolling through his tweets that the 19 year old did not seem like a religious extremist at all.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Yeah, ban this guy. And you guys thought I was the fucking troll. :lol:

Sorry for being a faggot. I guess you could not name a time a gay Anarchist strung up a muslim. Please some one ban me my faggotry is upsetting people.

Next thing you know I will want to marry or be able to flirt with a man without being accused of throwing my sexuality in your face

[tachosomoza]

Both brothers? Because I'm fairly certain after scrolling through his tweets that the 19 year old did not seem like a religious extremist at all.

The older one was definitely an extremist, the younger one was under his thumb and went along with his plan, probably out of fear.

[RadioRaheem84]

Sorry for being a faggot. I guess you could not name a time a gay Anarchist strung up a muslim. Please some one ban me my faggotry is upsetting people.

Next thing you know I will want to marry or be able to flirt with a man without being accused of throwing my sexuality in your face

Ban, please.

[Comrade Nasser]

Sorry for being a faggot. I guess you could not name a time a gay Anarchist strung up a muslim. Please some one ban me my faggotry is upsetting people.

Next thing you know I will want to marry or be able to flirt with a man without being accused of throwing my sexuality in your face

Why aren't you banned yet? Back to scumfront with you!

[tachosomoza]

Then you're not an anarchist or in anyway a leftist. This isn't about conditions of poverty but literally about conditions in which imperialism and capitalism have an affect on people. There are people who believe in dogmatic things all the time, Christians and Jews do too but it's a holdover from the past, their actions when they take it to the streets and wage war is political, not religious. They want to change laws in favor of their religion because they believe it will create stability or attack a power they feel is causing instability. That is a political cause and movement. Religion has no real material bearing on it because if you thought like a materialist, which most anarchists are, then you would know that religion is merely the result of people's material conditions. People do not have to be rich, poor or in between to know the world is fucked up and thus turn to religion for a sense of peace and guidance, especially in a capitalist world which offers only callous cash payment as the nexus between men.

Religion, is a side effect of the reigning system, not the cause of it.

Learn something before you go around acting all brash.

No, this is about an older brother who for some reason decided to become deeply involved in the negative, violent aspects of his faith, learned how to make crude bombs on the internet, and launched a terrorist attack on a crowd of civilians. This guy didn't want to change anything, he wanted to kill and maim under the guise of his religion. I nor anybody else may ever know exactly why he became so radical, he may have been a sociopath or another type of mentally ill person who would have killed regardless, but to say that extremist religion wasn't the key factor, as far as we know, in this action is willful self-deception. Now, because of his complicity with his elder brother's insanity, last night was Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's last night of freedom.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

communist to LGBT community: "you fucking islamophobes, fuck you, fuck you, how dare you point out that Islamic texts has about as much reactionary shit as mein kampf, that is like, so culturally insensitive, just because Islam believes you should be put to death does not mean you can say nasty words about it"

[RadioRaheem84]

communist to LGBT community: "you fucking islamophobes, fuck you, fuck you, how dare you point out that Islamic texts has about as much reactionary shit as mein kampf, that is like, so culturally insensitive, just because Islam believes you should be put to death does not mean you can say nasty words about it"

I think the point is that reducing your analysis to Islam is shit is missing the forest for the trees. Stop making it sound as though we mean to call people reactionary because they're criticizing religion.

If you cannot figure that out then you need to go to the learning section of the forum and start asking questions instead of storming in here like brash trollzilla.

[Fourth Internationalist]

communist to LGBT community: "you fucking islamophobes, fuck you, fuck you, how dare you point out that Islamic texts has about as much reactionary shit as mein kampf, that is like, so culturally insensitive, just because Islam believes you should be put to death does not mean you can say nasty words about it"

I'm pretty sure no one has said that. :)

[Aleksandr Karelin]

I think the point is that reducing your analysis to Islam is shit is missing the forest for the trees. Stop making it sound as though we mean to call people reactionary because they're criticizing religion.

If you cannot figure that out then you need to go to the learning section of the forum and start asking questions instead of storming in here like brash trollzilla.

Do you say fuck fascism, fuck NSM? Why is this an ok thing to say but not fuck Allah or fuck Islam. Both are Ideologies, not races of people, both draw people in terrible material conditions as well as rich people like Osama B or millionaire white motherfuckers. They are the same, but your already set for you view can not accept that.

They both would execute me, because of my sexuality. Fuck you for trying to make me not say so.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

I think the point is that reducing your analysis to Islam is shit is missing the forest for the trees. Stop making it sound as though we mean to call people reactionary because they're criticizing religion.

If you cannot figure that out then you need to go to the learning section of the forum and start asking questions instead of storming in here like brash trollzilla.

OK as long as you don't criticize Fascism or christian movements that slaughter people in Africa. Deal?

Or how about we have a stance to be against anyone who wants to kill gay people. Can we dfo that? Or is that not a big deal. Jesus am I fucking on scumfront.

[tachosomoza]

Do you say fuck fascism, fuck NSM? Why is this an ok thing to say but not fuck Allah or fuck Islam. Both are Ideologies, not races of people, both draw people in terrible material conditions as well as rich people like Osama B or millionaire white motherfuckers. They are the same, but your already set for you view can not accept that.

They both would execute me, because of my sexuality. Fuck you for trying to make me not say so.

Actually, a fascist would be more likely to kill you because of your sexuality than an average Muslim, since according to them you are a degenerate shitbag that is a shame to your "nation" and "race". Yeah, if you're out and proud in Afghanistan or the Arabian peninsula you'll probably get hurt, but most Muslims here don't care. It's an education thing.

[RadioRaheem84]

No, this is about an older brother who for some reason decided to become deeply involved in the negative, violent aspects of his faith, learned how to make crude bombs on the internet, and launched a terrorist attack on a crowd of civilians. This guy didn't want to change anything, he wanted to kill and maim under the guise of his religion. I nor anybody else may ever know exactly why he became so radical, he may have been a sociopath or another type of mentally ill person who would have killed regardless, but to say that extremist religion wasn't the key factor, as far as we know, in this action is willful self-deception. Now, because of his complicity with his elder brother's insanity, last night was Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's last night of freedom.

Since it's too early to determine anything yet, I think it's safe to say that if this act was religiously motivated, as in done in the name of his religion, then it was a political statement whether he meant it to be or not. When people do this in the name of their religion they are attacking a nation or a symbol they think is causing instability and the solution is their politicized brand of religion.

To say that it was just because of religious fervor is missing the forest for the trees.

When the mass shooters began shooting people because of some delusional belief then it was because of a lack of mental health help due to the lack of universal healthcare which is likewise tied to material conditions within this capitalist system.

I mean you always have to look at the root. People turn to these extreme brand of religions because it is a rejection of the ills they see in society. Instead of being radicalized to help and be motivated by social political causes which other people like you and I do when we organize, they join terrorist groups.

Not only Muslims do this but so do white people out in rural America who politicize their Christian beliefs and become reactionary social conservatives. They will attack the institutions that they believe are bringing about instability.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Actually, a fascist would be more likely to kill you because of your sexuality than an average Muslim, since according to them you are a degenerate shitbag that is a shame to your "nation" and "race". Yeah, if you're out and proud in Afghanistan or the Arabian peninsula you'll probably get hurt, but most Muslims here don't care. It's an education thing.

so merciful thank you!!!!!!!

I hear they just hurt those gay guys in Iran too, they just tied the rope, gravity killed them, not islam. And remember, Gravity is subject to harsh conditions in the universe so its not about gravity but the forces that rule matter.

[RadioRaheem84]

OK as long as you don't criticize Fascism or christian movements that slaughter people in Africa. Deal?

Or how about we have a stance to be against anyone who wants to kill gay people. Can we dfo that? Or is that not a big deal. Jesus am I fucking on scumfront.

Why are you so fucking dense?

The only answer could be that you're a troll or one hella stubborn ass anarchist that will not just debate normally. The line is starting to get thin as is my patience for you.

It's easy to explain. If you're an anarchist, which you claim you are, you came to that point because you saw ills in this society that you believe were caused by some greater forces. Instead of going to religion or shutting the hell up and becoming a materialistic consumer apathetic passerby, you became an anarchist.

Well others turn to violent religious extremism as a means to protest or attack the core of the problem.

The entire point though is that the religious extremism is not the root cause of the fucking crisis. Shit, man!

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Why are you so fucking dense?

The only answer could be that you're a troll or one hella stubborn ass anarchist that will not just debate normally. The line is starting to get thin as is my patience for you.

It's easy to explain. If you're an anarchist, which you claim you are, you came to that point because you saw ills in this society that you believe were caused by some greater forces. Instead of going to religion or shutting the hell up and becoming a materialistic consumer apathetic passerby, you became an anarchist.

Well others turn to violent religious extremism as a means to protest or attack the core of the problem.

The entire point though is that the religious extremism is not the root cause of the fucking crisis. Shit, man!

If someone says fuck racism do you start asking for the person to be banned, if not is that because you hate gay people but support black people?

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Why are you so fucking dense?

The only answer could be that you're a troll or one hella stubborn ass anarchist that will not just debate normally. The line is starting to get thin as is my patience for you.

It's easy to explain. If you're an anarchist, which you claim you are, you came to that point because you saw ills in this society that you believe were caused by some greater forces. Instead of going to religion or shutting the hell up and becoming a materialistic consumer apathetic passerby, you became an anarchist.

Well others turn to violent religious extremism as a means to protest or attack the core of the problem.

The entire point though is that the religious extremism is not the root cause of the fucking crisis. Shit, man!

I became an Anarchist because I work a shitty job for shit money and have fuck all. Please don't talk to me like this, being a condescending fuck is not appealing.

[tachosomoza]

http://scribblelive.mobi/Event/Live_blog_Explosion_in_Copley_Square?Theme=4013&lang=en

Here's the liveblog I've been following all week, from the explosion to the capture. I hope nobody has to have a week like this again.

Also, I'd advise ignoring the fool above me.

[Rational Radical]

This I understand more than anyone here. Islamic fundamentalists will hate us regardless, though.
"They hate us because they hate us" .No point in reasoning with this reactionary y'all,get the banning.

[tachosomoza]

"They hate us because they hate us" .No point in reasoning with this reactionary y'all,get the banning.

No, they hate us because we represent everything they have been conditioned to hate and have been destroying their countries/killing them for decades.

I'm not the reactionary here, I was verging it earlier and got tackled by 75% of the forum but have jumped out of my ecstatic funk.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

No, they hate us because we represent everything they have been conditioned to hate and have been destroying their countries/killing them for decades.

Did you go and ask every muslim or are you just speaking on every single muslims behalf? determinism and static analysis is so common among the left wing of capital and historical materialists.

[RadioRaheem84]

I became an Anarchist because I work a shitty job for shit money and have fuck all. Please don't talk to me like this, being a condescending fuck is not appealing.

Right, you became an anarchist because you saw the inequality and exploitation in the workplace which you see translates into social antagonisms between people in society. It has ramifications on grand scale.

A lot of people do not take that step and seeing that but instead interpret those antagonisms religiously. Just because they couch it in religious rhetoric doesn't dissolve the material conditions which brought about that false analysis.

People join militia groups, terrorist cells, or suicide missions because they interpret things which you have seen to be social/economic in root as moral.

So it's not extreme religion that is the root cause, but the conditions that bring it about.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Please don't talk to me like this, being a condescending fuck is not appealing.

Oh the irony. :laugh:

[RadioRaheem84]

Did you go and ask every muslim or are you just speaking on every single muslims behalf? determinism and static analysis is so common among the left wing of capital and historical materialists.

Wait, are you an anarcho-capitalist?

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Right, you became an anarchist because you saw the inequality and exploitation in the workplace which you see translates into social antagonisms between people in society. It has ramifications on grand scale.

A lot of people do not take that step and seeing that but instead interpret those antagonisms religiously. Just because they couch it in religious rhetoric doesn't dissolve the material conditions which brought about that false analysis.

People join militia groups, terrorist cells, or suicide missions because they interpret things which you have seen to be social/economic in root as moral.

So it's not extreme religion that is the root cause, but the conditions that bring it about.

People join the KKK and militias because they see a problem in society and blame it on black people and jews. Why can we criticize their ideology but not the islamic one people join, both are hateful and reactionary.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Wait, are you an anarcho-capitalist?

No I am a class struggle Anarchist.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Oh the irony. :laugh:

One liners still. Were you the kid that tagged along with the bullies in school to fit in? Trends homie, trends

[Deity]

So this is not a boston bombing thread, but an "are you actually a leftist" debate?

I'd like to discuss the bombing, so if you guys could take this somewhere else so we can try and clean this up I, and probably anyone else interested in a Boston bombing discussion, would appreciate it.

[Rational Radical]

No, they hate us because we represent everything they have been conditioned to hate and have been destroying their countries/killing them for decades.

I'm not the reactionary here, I was verging it earlier but have jumped out of my ecstatic funk.

mehh you got it half right, I don't know what "we" represent but they're a result of US imperialism,abject poverty and religious fanaticism which provided a distorted view of the world,false sense of solidarity and a solution to their miserable existence.It takes more than just saying you're not a reactionary any more to actually cease to be one *sigh*,I'msure you being a black jew wouldn't like racist generalizations of people who looked like you right ?

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Still not sure why the KKK and racists are not given a pass because of material conditions, most being poor white workers but islamists are. Is it really as simple as a black person being lynched is wrong but a gay man or woman being hung for being gay is only slightly bad but won't challenge your agenda?

[RadioRaheem84]

People join the KKK and militias because they see a problem in society and blame it on black people and jews. Why can we criticize their ideology but not the islamic one people join, both are hateful and reactionary.

How do you not see that the same analysis applies to the KKK. We challenge the KKK and fascist militia groups all the time. What are you ranting on about? :confused:

[Aleksandr Karelin]

How do you not see that the same analysis applies to the KKK. We challenge the KKK and fascist militia groups all the time. What are you ranting on about? :confused:

But you would not give a pass to combat 18 for killing a black person because they are a result of material conditions and act like they have no free will, but you are doing that about islam and the actions and beliefs of muslims.

[Red Commissar]

People join the KKK and militias because they see a problem in society and blame it on black people and jews. Why can we criticize their ideology but not the islamic one people join, both are hateful and reactionary.

eh who said you couldn't take that position? I'm pretty sure all the other times we discuss hate groups here we look at material conditions. It just seems to me you have an axe to grind about something.

[RadioRaheem84]

So this is not a boston bombing thread, but an "are you actually a leftist" debate?

I'd like to discuss the bombing, so if you guys could take this somewhere else so we can try and clean this up I, and probably anyone else interested in a Boston bombing discussion, would appreciate it.

I would too but this is also a case of dealing with the old notions that the problem is solely religious, which is a rather reactionary position that supposed leftists take because think our analysis it too narrow.

Really I think the other guy is just a troll.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

I would too but this is also a case of dealing with the old notions that the problem is solely religious, which is a rather reactionary position that supposed leftists take because think our analysis it too narrow.

Really I think the other guy is just a troll.

When you discuss the holocaust do you discuss the horrific extermination of jews, gays and gypsies or do you focus on Hitlers conditions that lead him to his views?

You know what my issue is.

[RadioRaheem84]

But you would not give a pass to combat 18 for killing a black person because they are a result of material conditions and act like they have no free will, but you are doing that about islam and the actions and beliefs of muslims.

None of these groups get a pass, you dolt. We understand the conditions which bring about these movements but that doesn't mean that we still don't fight them, literally in the streets sometimes; fascists, right wing reactionaries, racist hate groups and even yes radical Islamic fundamentalists, which our comrades in the middle east constantly fight.

What part of this are you failing to grasp?

[Fourth Internationalist]

People join the KKK and militias because they see a problem in society and blame it on black people and jews. Why can we criticize their ideology but not the islamic one people join, both are hateful and reactionary. No one is saying Islam, or any other religion or ideology, is uncriticizable.


One liners still. Were you the kid that tagged along with the bullies in school to fit in? Trends homie, trends No, and I don't plan on doing so as I am still in school. Also, it seems more like you'd be quite the bully, considering that you hate Moslems, so why not harass them and bully them until they, say, commit suicide, right? Or until everyone shuns them which makes them backlash by becoming radical Islamists themselves?


Yes I do have a phobia of Muslims, because ya know, they string people like me up for existing.As you said, you hate them. Moslems that I know don't hate people like you, or if they do it's because you're such a bigot and think they're all terrorists and want to hang you, a just reason I would agree with.

[Deity]

When you discuss the holocaust do you discuss the horrific extermination of jews, gays and gypsies or do you focus on Hitlers conditions that lead him to his views?

You know what my issue is.

You don't think that knowing why Hitler did it is Important to ensuring it doesn't happen again?

[RadioRaheem84]

When you discuss the holocaust do you discuss the horrific extermination of jews, gays and gypsies or do you focus on Hitlers conditions that lead him to his views?

You know what my issue is.

Discussing the conditions which brought about a Hitler, a Saddam or even a grand wizard of the KKK / = excusing their actions.

understanding / = excusing or wiping away their actions.

The way you're thinking is very reactionary indeed. If you're new to Anarchism or leftism, then I apologize but you have come in here rather brazenly arrogant and angry and refuse to want to learn.

[RadioRaheem84]

On a side note, it should be noted that when reactionaries accuse us of apologizing for terrorists, Nazis and racists by understanding their movements and the conditions which bring them about, many leftists have fought and died combating those same movements while understanding their movements and the conditions which bring them about. So no we do not excuse or apologize for them in fact when they surface we tend to beat back the most reactionary disgusting and hideously violent elements which spring forward from the loins of capitalism. Seriously, gangsterism, organized crime, religious extremists, oligarchs, speculators, racists, facscists, nazis, etc. The list goes on.

Meanwhile the same reactionaries that blame us for apologizing for the forces attacking them now are the same ones who used to prop them up all over the world to take us down.

I don't buy that argument. It's disgusting.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Discussing the conditions which brought about a Hitler, a Saddam or even a grand wizard of the KKK / = excusing their actions.

understanding / = excusing or wiping away their actions.

The way you're thinking is very reactionary indeed. If you're new to Anarchism or leftism, then I apologize but you have come in here rather brazenly arrogant and angry and refuse to want to learn.

I have never heard anyone blame the holocaust on well off jews on the left. I have heard people blaming Muslims blowing up people in the west on western imperialism. What you do is say Muslims only blow people up or kill gays because they are in shitty conditions, you blame victims on 9/11 not on the actual people who did it but use rhetoric to aleviate responsibility.

Muslims blow someone up can't be because they are intolerant sexist gay hating fucks, it has to be because of foreign policy. When a racist kills someone or the Nazis exterminated people, you did not blame other people, you blame them and rightly so.

[Comrade Nasser]

I have never heard anyone blame the holocaust on well off jews on the left. I have heard people blaming Muslims blowing up people in the west on western imperialism. What you do is say Muslims only blow people up or kill gays because they are in shitty conditions, you blame victims on 9/11 not on the actual people who did it but use rhetoric to aleviate responsibility.

Muslims blow someone up can't be because they are intolerant sexist gay hating fucks, it has to be because of foreign policy. When a racist kills someone or the Nazis exterminated people, you did not blame other people, you blame them and rightly so.

http://f.kulfoto.com/pic/0001/0015/47t2114508.jpg

[Aleksandr Karelin]

http://f.kulfoto.com/pic/0001/0015/47t2114508.jpg

This is what happens when you can not explain your shit stance.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I have never heard anyone blame the holocaust on well off jews on the left. I have heard people blaming Muslims blowing up people in the west on western imperialism. What you do is say Muslims only blow people up or kill gays because they are in shitty conditions, you blame victims on 9/11 not on the actual people who did it but use rhetoric to aleviate responsibility.

Muslims blow someone up can't be because they are intolerant sexist gay hating fucks, it has to be because of foreign policy. When a racist kills someone or the Nazis exterminated people, you did not blame other people, you blame them and rightly so.

I'd recommend re-reading RadioRaheem84's posts. You clearly didn't understand his points well enough to make an appropriate response.

[Comrade Nasser]

This is what happens when you can not explain your shit stance.

http://2damnfunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Willy-Wonka-Meme-Sees-Your-Argument-Is-Full-Of-Emotion.jpg

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Why is the response as soon as a muslim blows kids up and post a video saying why the slags deserved it in martyrdom videos the first response on this site is, oh fucking foreign poklicy causing this.

When a black teen is murdered by a white racist it is, fuck that racist fuck. fuck racism etc etc.

I saw more outrage amongst leftist when trayvon martin got shot than from this bombing. It just shows how far from a consistent materialist analysis of the subject you are. It also shows conformation bias to fit an ideology that is rigid as fuck. This grup of people are helpless to their conditions. these people are condemnation worthier than this other bunch of intolerant fucks. etc etc

[Deity]

This is what happens when you can not explain your shit stance.

You're just babbling on about things that are irrelevant or have already been explained and in result you are cluttering a thread that I was interested in.

you are NOT making any relevant or thought worthy posts. Muslims are not all sexist terrorists. Now please take a deep breath, collect your thoughts, and decide if you want to continue this foolhardy discussion.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

http://2damnfunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Willy-Wonka-Meme-Sees-Your-Argument-Is-Full-Of-Emotion.jpg

Did you recently refer to someone as a troll. Wow.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

You're just babbling on about things that are irrelevant or have already been explained and in result you are cluttering a thread that I was interested in.

you are NOT making any relevant or thought worthy posts. Muslims are not all sexist terrorists. Now please take a deep breath, collect your thoughts, and decide if you want to continue this foolhardy discussion.

No you are not addressing my points, you are knocking down straw men.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Why is the response as soon as a muslim blows kids up and post a video saying why the slags deserved it in martyrdom videos the first response on this site is, oh fucking foreign poklicy causing this.

When a black teen is murdered by a white racist it is, fuck that racist fuck. fuck racism etc etc.

I saw more outrage amongst leftist when trayvon martin got shot than from this bombing. It just shows how far from a consistent materialist analysis of the subject you are. It also shows conformation bias to fit an ideology that is rigid as fuck. This grup of people are helpless to their conditions. these people are condemnation worthier than this other bunch of intolerant fucks. etc etc

Anyone and actually adress the points or do not reply? thanks.

[Comrade Nasser]

Why is the response as soon as a muslim blows kids up and post a video saying why the slags deserved it in martyrdom videos the first response on this site is, oh fucking foreign poklicy causing this.

When a black teen is murdered by a white racist it is, fuck that racist fuck. fuck racism etc etc.

I saw more outrage amongst leftist when trayvon martin got shot than from this bombing. It just shows how far from a consistent materialist analysis of the subject you are. It also shows conformation bias to fit an ideology that is rigid as fuck. This grup of people are helpless to their conditions. these people are condemnation worthier than this other bunch of intolerant fucks. etc etc

http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i51/5/8/20/frabz-Oh-so-you-hate-Muslims-for-their-violent-and-murderous-beliefs-L-d93600.jpg

You're posts really aren't worth arguing over, so I shall post memes until you realize that you should just probably leave.

[Hermes]

I have never heard anyone blame the holocaust on well off jews on the left. I have heard people blaming Muslims blowing up people in the west on western imperialism. What you do is say Muslims only blow people up or kill gays because they are in shitty conditions, you blame victims on 9/11 not on the actual people who did it but use rhetoric to aleviate responsibility.

Muslims blow someone up can't be because they are intolerant sexist gay hating fucks, it has to be because of foreign policy. When a racist kills someone or the Nazis exterminated people, you did not blame other people, you blame them and rightly so.

Understanding the material conditions that brought about the holocaust, and more generally WW2, is not the same as to 'blame...well off jews'. Western imperialism is largely responsible for the rise of extremist religions, so I guess in a sense you could say that some of the victims of 9/11 were complicit.

None of this, though, excuses the person responsible, which you seem to be claiming. We're just not blindly denouncing him and calling hatred on all who follow the religion.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Why is the response as soon as a muslim blows kids up and post a video saying why the slags deserved it in martyrdom videos the first response on this site is, oh fucking foreign poklicy causing this.

When a black teen is murdered by a white racist it is, fuck that racist fuck. fuck racism etc etc.

I saw more outrage amongst leftist when trayvon martin got shot than from this bombing. It just shows how far from a consistent materialist analysis of the subject you are. It also shows conformation bias to fit an ideology that is rigid as fuck. This grup of people are helpless to their conditions. these people are condemnation worthier than this other bunch of intolerant fucks. etc etc

You really need to re-read and understand what people (RadioRaheem84) are saying. It's quite evident that you are not grasping it.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i51/5/8/20/frabz-Oh-so-you-hate-Muslims-for-their-violent-and-murderous-beliefs-L-d93600.jpg

You're posts really aren't worth arguing over, so I shall post memes until you realize that you should just probably leave.

Yep Christianize is disgusting too. Are you 14? Do you often call people trolls then troll an entire thread because you can't actually respond to the points? I take it you don't organize in your workplace or maybe you don't actually work?

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Yep Christianize is disgusting too. Are you 14? Do you often call people trolls then troll an entire thread because you can't actually respond to the points? I take it you don't organize in your workplace or maybe you don't actually work?

Also, are Christian attacks on civilians so disparate that you have to go back to the crusades? Strong argument.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Yep Christianize is disgusting too. Are you 14? Do you often call people trolls then troll an entire thread because you can't actually respond to the points? I take it you don't organize in your workplace or maybe you don't actually work?

Do you also hate all Christians as well as Moslems? (Why ageism? It's quite insulting because I was 14 about 3 days ago.)

[Comrade Nasser]

Yep Christianize is disgusting too. Are you 14? Do you often call people trolls then troll an entire thread because you can't actually respond to the points? I take it you don't organize in your workplace or maybe you don't actually work?

No more memes :(

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Do you also hate all Christians as well as Moslems? (Why ageism? It's quite insulting because I was 14 about 3 days ago.)

Christianity and Islam both advocate slavery and the executon of gays. Why would I not hate those Ideologies but hate fascism? If a neo nazi advocated slavery would you say you hate him? Well if someone says they support Islam and it is in their holy book, how is that different?
Did you read any political theory or did you get here from some idealistic notion of things being fair? Can you give me an analysis of the economic system under which you live? one not copied and pasted?

Ageism, next time someone calls you a fucking faggot and hits you in the face for being 14 come and talk to me about ageism. Yes at 14 your views wont be the same when you are 18 lol.

[Deity]

Ok Aleksandr Karelin here is the reply you are begging for.

"Originally Posted by Aleksandr Karelin
Why is the response as soon as a muslim blows kids up and post a video saying why the slags deserved it in martyrdom videos the first response on this site is, oh fucking foreign poklicy causing this."

The foreign policy does cause many of these issues. Despite what Bush may have told you the "Terrorists" do not hate us for our freedoms! We also say fuck extremism and extremists. I have not once on here seen anybody say anything positive about an extremist killing civilians.

"When a black teen is murdered by a white racist it is, fuck that racist fuck. fuck racism etc etc."

Yeah basically, fuck racism? I also say fuck religious zealots so I don't see why that seems hypocritical to you.


"I saw more outrage amongst leftist when trayvon martin got shot than from this bombing. It just shows how far from a consistent materialist analysis of the subject you are. It also shows conformation bias to fit an ideology that is rigid as fuck. This grup of people are helpless to their conditions. these people are condemnation worthier than this other bunch of intolerant fucks. etc etc"

I can't tell you why other people say what they say, but Trayvon Martin was a clear case of racism while this is still a "To be determined" type of situation. Until the alleged bomber explains why (if he does) we don't actually know why this happened.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I feel the need to respond to this but I think it'd be better to do so here because the fascist/troll alert thread is not the place to do so.


I am an anarchist and am being hounded by like 6 users ebcause I said islam is a reactionary disgustiing ideology.

No, we are attacking you because you blatantly say you hate Moslems. You know, I care about my Moslem friends, and they're not terrorists.


I don't see how a queer person hating islam, which calls for my death is trolling.

There is nothing wrong with hating Islam, I do to along with the other Abrahamic religions, but hating those who don't even believe in half of their holy book (cherry picking) is quite stupid.


I am also sick of the blatant over the top hounding of me and personal attacks seemingly for being a faggot and daring to say islam may not have the right to put me to death for sucking cock.

No one is attacking you for being homosexual, as we are very pro-gay rights, pro-feminist, etc. In fact, a large amount of our members, including myself, are LGBT.


Homophobia wrapped up in defending islam, suprised a leftist forum barely hides its hatred of me for being queer. Thought you might at least try and veil it a little.Don't play victim. It's petty.

[Hexen]

http://www.timwise.org/2013/04/terrorism-and-privilege-understanding-the-power-of-whiteness/


Terrorism and Privilege: Understanding the Power of Whiteness (http://www.timwise.org/2013/04/terrorism-and-privilege-understanding-the-power-of-whiteness/)

Posted on April 16, 2013

As the nation weeps for the victims of the horrific bombing in Boston yesterday, one searches for lessons amid the carnage, and finds few. That violence is unacceptable stands out as one, sure. That hatred — for humanity, for life, or whatever else might have animated the bomber or bombers — is never the source of constructive human action seems like a reasonably close second.
But I dare say there is more; a much less obvious and far more uncomfortable lesson, which many are loathe to learn, but which an event such as this makes readily apparent, and which we must acknowledge, no matter how painful.
It is a lesson about race, about whiteness, and specifically, about white privilege.
I know you don’t want to hear it. But I don’t much care. So here goes.
White privilege is knowing that even if the Boston Marathon bomber turns out to be white, his or her identity will not result in white folks generally being singled out for suspicion by law enforcement, or the TSA, or the FBI.
White privilege is knowing that even if the bomber turns out to be white, no one will call for whites to be profiled as terrorists as a result, subjected to special screening, or threatened with deportation.
White privilege is knowing that if the bomber turns out to be white, he or she will be viewed as an exception to an otherwise non-white rule, an aberration, an anomaly, and that he or she will be able to join the ranks of pantheon of white people who engage in (or have plotted) politically motivated violence meant to terrorize — and specifically to kill — but whose actions result in the assumption of absolutely nothing about white people generally, or white Christians in particular.
Among these: Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing) and Ted Kaczynski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Kaczynski) and Eric Rudolph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph) and Joe Stack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack) and George Metesky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Metesky) and Byron De La Beckwith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_De_La_Beckwith) and Bobby Frank Cherry and Thomas Blanton and Herman Frank Cash and Robert Chambliss (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16th_Street_Baptist_Church_bombing) and James von Brunn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Wenneker_von_Brunn) and Lawrence Michael Lombardi (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2000/summer/hate-on-campus#.UXHJ1L9vETM) and Robert Mathews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Jay_Mathews) and David Lane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lane_%28Neo-Nazi%29) and Chevie Kehoe (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/1998/fall/kehoe-republic#.UXHM9L9vETM) and Michael F. Griffin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_F._Griffin) and Paul Hill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Jennings_Hill) and John Salvi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Salvi) and Justin Carl Moose (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2011/spring/would-be-clinic-bomber-saw-himself-as#.UXHIsr9vETM) and Bruce and Joshua Turnidge (http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/12/20/mosque-arsonist-pleads-guilty-implicates-fox-news-in-fueling-hate/#more-10133) and James Kopp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Charles_Kopp) and Luke Helder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Helder) and James David Adkisson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knoxville_Unitarian_Universalist_church_shooting) and Scott Roeder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_George_Tiller) and Shelley Shannon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelley_Shannon) and Dennis Mahon (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/dennis_mahon_arizona_bombing_sentence_40_years.php ) and Wade Michael Page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Wisconsin_Sikh_temple_shooting) and Jeffery Harbin (http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/01/28/neo-nazi-indicted-for-bombs-is-son-of-movement-stalwart/) and Byron Williams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_Williams_%28shooter%29) and Charles Ray Polk and Willie Ray Lampley and Cecilia Lampley and John Dare Baird and Joseph Martin Bailie (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,1#.UXHON79vETN) and Ray Hamblin and Robert Edward Starr III and William James McCranie Jr. and John Pitner and Charles Barbee and Robert Berry and Jay Merrell (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,2#.UXHN-79vETM) and Brendon Blasz and Carl Jay Waskom Jr. and Shawn and Catherine Adams and Edward Taylor Jr. and Todd Vanbiber and William Robert Goehler and James Cleaver and Jack Dowell and Bradley Playford Glover (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,3#.UXHPSL9vETM) and Ken Carter and Randy Graham and Bradford Metcalf (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,4#.UXHQ4b9vETM) and Chris Scott Gilliam and Gary Matson and Winfield Mowder and Buford Furrow and Benjamin Smith and Donald Rudolph and Kevin Ray Patterson and Charles Dennis Kiles and Donald Beauregard and Troy Diver (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,5#.UXHTXb9vETM) and Mark Wayne McCool (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,6#.UXHUfr9vETM) and Leo Felton and Erica Chase and Clayton Lee Wagner (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,7#.UXHUzL9vETM) and Michael Edward Smith and David Burgert and Robert Barefoot Jr. (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,8#.UXHVTL9vETM) and Sean Gillespie and Ivan Duane Braden and (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2005/summer/terror-from-the-right-0?page=0,10#.UXHWMb9vETM)Kevin Harpham (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Spokane_bombing_attempt) and William Krar and Judith Bruey and Edward Feltus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Krar) and Raymond Kirk Dillard and Adam Lynn Cunningham and Bonnell Hughes and Randall Garrett Cole and James Ray McElroy (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18426038/#.UW2JJ79vETM) and Michael Gorbey (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/AR2008081502078.html) and Daniel Cowart and Paul Schlesselman (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96206272) and Frederick Thomas (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/01/4-suspected-us-militia-members-charged-in-plot/?test=latestnews#ixzz1cYhQoCRQ) and Paul Ross Evans (http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/04/28/us-texas-abortion-bomb-idUSN2719258620070428) and Matt Goldsby and Jimmy Simmons and Kathy Simmons and Kaye Wiggins (http://www.pensapedia.com/wiki/Christmas_abortion_bombings) and Patricia Hughes and Jeremy Dunahoe (http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?id=9766) and David McMenemy (http://www.kwqc.com/Global/story.asp?S=5395773) and Bobby Joe Rogers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Family_Planning) and Francis Grady (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/04/wisconsin-planned-parenthood-bombing-fbi_n_1402897.html) and Cody Seth Crawford (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2011/08/man_accused_of_hate_crime_in_corvallis_mosque_arso n.html) and Ralph Lang (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/26/madison-abortion-clinic-mass-murder_n_867822.html) and Demetrius Van Crocker (http://www.memphisflyer.com/memphis/homegrown-terrorist/Content?oid=1125783) and Floyd Raymond Looker (http://archive.adl.org/mwd/mountain.asp) and Derek Mathew Shrout (http://www.splcenter.org/home/2012/spring/alabama-teen-arrested-in-racist-high-school-terror-plot#.UXC9ab9vETM) and Randolph Linn (http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/12/20/mosque-arsonist-pleads-guilty-implicates-fox-news-in-fueling-hate/#more-10133).
Ya know, just to name a few.
And white privilege is being able to know nothing about the crimes committed by most of the terrorists listed above — indeed, never to have so much as heard most of their names — let alone to make assumptions about the role that their racial or ethnic identity may have played in their crimes.
White privilege is knowing that if the Boston bomber turns out to be white, we will not be asked to denounce him or her, so as to prove our own loyalties to the common national good. It is knowing that the next time a cop sees one of us standing on the sidewalk cheering on runners in a marathon, that cop will say exactly nothing to us as a result.
White privilege is knowing that if you are a white student from Nebraska — as opposed to, say, a student from Saudi Arabia — that no one, and I mean no one would think it important to detain and question you in the wake of a bombing such as the one at the Boston Marathon.
And white privilege is knowing that if this bomber turns out to be white, the United States government will not bomb whatever corn field or mountain town or stale suburb from which said bomber came, just to ensure that others like him or her don’t get any ideas. And if he turns out to be a member of the Irish Republican Army we won’t bomb Belfast. And if he’s an Italian American Catholic we won’t bomb the Vatican.
In short, white privilege is the thing that allows you (if you’re white) — and me — to view tragic events like this as merely horrific, and from the perspective of pure and innocent victims, rather than having to wonder, and to look over one’s shoulder, and to ask even if only in hushed tones, whether those we pass on the street might think that somehow we were involved.
It is the source of our unearned innocence and the cause of others’ unjustified oppression.
That is all. And it matters.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Christianity and Islam both advocate slavery and the executon of gays. Why would I not hate those Ideologies but hate fascism?

I am talking about the human beings that claim to adhere to the religion, those who believe it's all a religions of love and peace who know very little about what's in there holy book, Bible or Quran, NOT the religion itself.


Well if someone says they support Islam and it is in their holy book, how is that different?Because most Moslems know nothing about the bad stuff in the Qur'an because they don't read it. Same with Christians and the Bible.


Ageism, next time someone calls you a fucking faggot and hits you in the face for being 14 come and talk to me about ageism. Stereotyping people based on their age is ageism. You just did that. Get over it, I never compared it or even equated it to homophobia.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

http://www.timwise.org/2013/04/terrorism-and-privilege-understanding-the-power-of-whiteness/

This is irrelevant to my points. I condemn those white fucking reactionaries who blow people up, I am against all wars and all states. I also condemn muslims for executing people klike me for being gay, I blame islamic terrorists for blowing themselves up, not other fucking people. Straw men and copy and paste jobs. I am bored. Going to do gay stuff and walk the dog.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

[QUOTE=Aleksandr Karelin;2609860]Christianity and Islam both advocate slavery and the executon of gays. Why would I not hate those Ideologies but hate fascism?

I am talking about the human beings that claim to adhere to the religion, those who believe it's all a religions of love and peace who know very little about what's in there holy book, Bible or Quran, NOT the religion itself.



Because most Moslems know nothing about the bad stuff in the Qur'an because they don't read it. Same with Christians and the Bible.



Stereotyping people based on their age is ageism. You just did that. Get over it, I never compared it or even equated it to homophobia.

So if a neo nazi who barely knew anything about his organisation, no real political theory but was a member you would be really cool with that, despite his group advocating killing black people?

[Bostana]

[QUOTE=User Name;2609871]

So if a neo nazi who barely knew anything about his organisation, no real political theory but was a member you would be really cool with that, despite his group advocating killing black people?

God I hope america's public education isn't as bad as to make students it's ok to believe or enter something without actually learning anything about it

[Aleksandr Karelin]

[QUOTE=Aleksandr Karelin;2609874]

God I hope america's public education isn't as bad as to make students it's ok to believe or enter something without actually learning anything about it

I am not from America you imbecile. Aren't you the person that claimed a gay man could not say faggot?

[Fourth Internationalist]

So if a neo nazi who barely knew anything about his organisation, no real political theory but was a member you would be really cool with that, despite his group advocating killing black people?

I'm not 100% cool with it, but I don't hate him or her, nor neccesarily dislike him or her. Why? Because he or she doesn't know what Nazism was about, same with Moslems and Islam, Christians and Christianity, etc. Most people, let's use Christians as an example, know about the "Love thy Neighbour" and "Blessed are the Merciful". Most, however, do not know "Stone thy daughter if she refuses to marry her rapist". Thus, they cannot be judged based on something they don't know exists and don't believe in.

[Bostana]

[QUOTE=Bostana;2609880]

I am not from America you imbecile. Aren't you the person that claimed a gay man could not say faggot?

I wouldn't know a single self respecting one who would

[Fourth Internationalist]

I also condemn muslims for executing people klike me for being gay,

My Moslem friends have never executed anyone, so stop saying that's what Moslems do.


I blame islamic terrorists for blowing themselves up, not other fucking people. No one is blaming others. They are simply stating that material conditions lead them to this. This is what materialism is, that material conditions cause all things. Are you a materialist?

[Aleksandr Karelin]

My Moslem friends have never executed anyone, so stop saying that's what Moslems do.

No one is blaming others. They are simply stating that material conditions lead them to this. This is what materialism is, that material conditions cause all things. Are you a materialist?

So I guess George bush should not be criticised, after all material conditions lead to everything and personal responsibility for ones actions does not matter. Or it does matter, but is touted far more for one certain group who execute gay people and commit suicide attacks but is far less important in revlefts analysis of others, according to their particular ridiculous theory that takes dialectics into some crazy metaphysical world of determinism.

[Comrade Nasser]

[QUOTE=Bostana;2609880]

I am not from America you imbecile. Aren't you the person that claimed a gay man could not say faggot?

One of my close friends is gay asshole. I remember freshmen year in high school some idiots called him that absolutely fucking disgusting word, and he started to cry. You know what I did? I got in a fight with them, me at the time being a small freshmen got the tar beat out of me and I got suspended for 2 days. But I don't give a fuck. I'd do it again. So fuck you, to even imply that I am a homophobe, and shame on you for using that word.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

[QUOTE=Aleksandr Karelin;2609882]

I wouldn't know a single self respecting one who would

I guess every black man who follows nas along does not respect their self? context, context you idiot.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

[QUOTE=Aleksandr Karelin;2609882]

One of my close friends is gay asshole. I remember freshmen year in high school some idiots called him that absolutely fucking disgusting word, and he started to cry. You know what I did? I got in a fight with them, me at the time being a small freshmen got the tar beat out of me and I got suspended for 2 days. But I don't give a fuck. I'd do it again. So fuck you, to even imply that I am a homophobe, and shame on you for using that word.

Do you tell black people if they can drop the N bomb?

I am queer, I can say faggot if I want. Also great, thanks for being a weird patronizing moron to gay people everywhere. Oh you have a gay friend, do you have black ones too :D

This is just, wow.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Are hetrosexual males telling a gay person what words they can or can not use. Is this a leftist forum? Holy shit, holy fucking shit.

[Comrade Nasser]

[QUOTE=TheRedScare;2609889]

Do you tell black people if they can drop the N bomb?

I am queer, I can say faggot if I want. Also great, thanks for being a weird patronizing moron to gay people everywhere. Oh you have a gay friend, do you have black ones too :D

This is just, wow.

I was using my friend as an example. How am I patronizing you or the gay community? I have LGBT friends, black friends, Arab friends, Asian friends, hispanic friends of EVERY COLOR. Because I do not judge people because of their religion or race they usually have no choice over it.

[Fourth Internationalist]

So I guess George bush should not be criticised, after all material conditions lead to everything and personal responsibility for ones actions does not matter.

Do you know what we mean when we say material conditions lead to certain actions? You seem to not to know.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Do you know what we mean when we say material conditions lead to certain actions? You seem to not to know.

Do I know anything about dialectical materialism and concrete analysis of concrete conditions? No, I don't.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

[QUOTE=Aleksandr Karelin;2609891]

I was using my friend as an example. How am I patronizing you or the gay community? I have LGBT friends, black friends, Arab friends, Asian friends, hispanic friends of EVERY COLOR. Because I do not judge people because of their religion or race they usually have no choice over it.

HE HAS BLACK FRIENDS

HE HAS GAY FRIENDS


:lol:

[Taters]

http://i.imgur.com/Q0lYtfB.gif

Ah, well, the thread was derailed ages ago, so I suppose it doesn't matter. Perhaps you should take a breather, Aleksandr, get some fresh air. It'd do us all some good.

[Comrade Nasser]

https://forums.playfire.com/_proxy/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fi218.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2F cc223%2Fjohncarter31%2Fgifs%2Fthreadwrecker.gif&hmac=ee92e5fc7291a136e0e2132968271e4e

Ah, well, the thread was derailed ages ago, so I suppose it doesn't matter. Perhaps you should take a breather, Aleksandr, get some fresh air. It'd do us all some good.

This thread basically started after the other thread was derailed :(

The mods should probably split all the posts relating to Aleksandr and his islamophobia and our reply's from the rest of the thread. Just a suggestion.

[MarxArchist]

So I guess George bush should not be criticised, after all material conditions.

You shouldn't even whisper the word material conditions or claim to have even an insects grasp on materialism in general after posting that you have more in common with right wing American libertarians than you do with Marxists and that an "anarcho" capitalist society can exist side by side with a socialist society. You sure are cocky in your false beliefs yes?

[Orange Juche]

To get kind of back on topic...

What impacts do you all think this will have in terms of right wing ideology and power (immigration/surveillance state), and what do you see the long term impacts societally being as a result of these attacks, based on what we can infer on the attackers now (some kind of connection to Islamist extremists)?

[Aleksandr Karelin]

You shouldn't even whisper the word material conditions or claim to have even an insects grasp on materialism in general after posting that you have more in common with right wing American libertarians than you do with Marxists and that an "anarcho" capitalist society can exist side by side with a socialist society. You sure are cocky in your false beliefs yes?

But if the determinist idea that conditions not ieas always shape action that the user I responded to is true, how can anyone claim responsibility for anything?

Geroge bush and Osama bin Laden both were rich people with families with fundamentalist leanings, yet I constantly hear the left blaming the material conditions of muslims for 9/11 yet the figuirehead had far greater conditions in his life than I do in mine as an underpaid poor worker, so was it his ideology of islam that made him fight to end the occupation of holy lands or was it phlanthropy, it was not the conditions of poverty and occupation that always gets used.

My points are very simple.

A) as a queer person I reserve the right to not like muslims because they hold views against me and I am against religion and people who would beat, kill or just simply hate me for being how I was born, Why would I not have a phobia (be sacred of) people who identify as muslims, when in their holy book it says to kill me?

If I told people I was a racialist and my book said to kill gays, do you think black people might hold negative views of me?


B) islamic terrorist attacks are blamed on America or foreign policy, It can never just be said by a leftist, that dude killed people because he was an intolerant fuck, the left always makes up some backstory why he is not responsible for his actions and down play the religious motivation and just talk about how white people are being racist and stereotyping Muslims, not talking about their attacks on innocent civilians, whereas if it is a white scumbag like Mcveigh, then it is all about his ideology and his cause (which it should be).

[MarxArchist]

To get kind of back on topic...

What impacts do you all think this will have in terms of right wing ideology and power (immigration/surveillance state), and what do you see the long term impacts societally being as a result of these attacks, based on what we can infer on the attackers now (some kind of connection to Islamist extremists)?

I think Obama and his supporters are no different than the right wing as far as what actually happens. Sure liberals and their politicians hide behind 'progressive values' and aren't going to take to the streets waving confederate flags but as far as supporting attacks on civil liberties and the murder of innocent people in the name of fighting terrorism they're right up there with the 'right' they just hide it all behind, well, a facade of morality. I tend to pay attention to what happens not whats said. You have to do that with bourgeois politicians and their supporters.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

But if the determinist idea that conditions not ieas always shape action that the user I responded to is true, how can anyone claim responsibility for anything?

Geroge bush and Osama bin Laden both were rich people with families with fundamentalist leanings, yet I constantly hear the left blaming the material conditions of muslims for 9/11 yet the figuirehead had far greater conditions in his life than I do in mine as an underpaid poor worker, so was it his ideology of islam that made him fight to end the occupation of holy lands or was it phlanthropy, it was not the conditions of poverty and occupation that always gets used.

My points are very simple.

A) as a queer person I reserve the right to not like muslims because they hold views against me and I am against religion and people who would beat, kill or just simply hate me for being how I was born, Why would I not have a phobia (be sacred of) people who identify as muslims, when in their holy book it says to kill me?

If I told people I was a racialist and my book said to kill gays, do you think black people might hold negative views of me?


B) islamic terrorist attacks are blamed on America or foreign policy, It can never just be said by a leftist, that dude killed people because he was an intolerant fuck, the left always makes up some backstory why he is not responsible for his actions and down play the religious motivation and just talk about how white people are being racist and stereotyping Muslims, not talking about their attacks on innocent civilians, whereas if it is a white scumbag like Mcveigh, then it is all about his ideology and his cause (which it should be).

Silence?

[Comrade Nasser]

Silence?

Take a hint...

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Take a hint...

Is the hint he has no reply without going completely off topic and not adressing points?

Maybe one of your many minority or gay friends can explain it, we know you have lots of those.

[Hermes]

Silence?

Materialism is not necessarily determinism. The material conditions surrounding a group of people, or a person, determine who they are, etc, what they think. Their choices, however, are independent, in so far as they can choose among what they've been provided by their conditions. It's why a member of the bourgeoisie can be a class traitor, or things of that nature.

(I know the above was shaky, I'm still learning as well)

For your first point, you should be able to recognize that not everyone who call themselves religious has ever even read their 'holy book'. You have every right to be afraid of someone who wants to kill you, but until that's known, I'm not sure you can justify it.

Second, I'd be very surprised if 'a white scumbag like Mcveigh' wasn't analyzed due to his material conditions. It's possible that he wasn't, but again I'd be surprised because you're right; it's inconsistent.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Silence?

I'd recommend reading something anything about materialism and understand about how most religious people know very little of the bad stuff in their holy texts thus you should not hate those people. Until then, there is no reason to simply repeat oursleves.

[tachosomoza]

To get kind of back on topic...

What impacts do you all think this will have in terms of right wing ideology and power (immigration/surveillance state), and what do you see the long term impacts societally being as a result of these attacks, based on what we can infer on the attackers now (some kind of connection to Islamist extremists)?

I definitely see a reactionary backlash in terms of immigration coming, especially since the older brother wasn't a citizen. I don't think it'll fly though, or at least hope we have enough good sense to not jump to crazy conclusions and make others suffer because of the actions of two assholes. Societally, in the short term I see an increase in attacks/discrimination against individuals from the Caucasus who would be mistaken for Chechens, but I don't see it sticking around for the long term like prejudice against Arabs has since 9/11.

[cynicles]

I'm starting to think that after reading 5 pages into this thread(I have no idea how people can follow anything beyond that with huge text walls and what not) that we need a giant educational seminar for half of the people who think they're on the far left about the role and nature of religion in society. Too many people who show up new to these forums offering up liberal reactionary interpretations of religion. To say nothing of their understanding of what ideology is or materialism, these are all basically 101 things. Also to all the people complaining about immigrants, if you or your ancestors are Europe, Asia or Africa try and think how we feel about both you historical and current presence on turtle island and the violence you and your countries exorcise on us then proceed to shut up.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

This is irrelevant to my points. I condemn those white fucking reactionaries who blow people up, I am against all wars and all states. I also condemn muslims for executing people klike me for being gay, I blame islamic terrorists for blowing themselves up, not other fucking people. Straw men and copy and paste jobs. I am bored. Going to do gay stuff and walk the dog.

There's a big fucking difference between Islam and Islamism you twat. I don't see my non-hijab wearing muslim Aunt and Uncle, who have a bisexual son, going around burning homosexuals and slaughtering children along with other family.

You sound like a member of the fucking BNP.

[Deity]

Conspiracy theories are firing all throughout the internet right now! There are "Free Jahar" pages and graphs attempting to prove his innocence.

Since I have not yet mentally condemned him I half-heartedly support these pages. Many Americans seem to be forgetting "innocent until proven guilty" and are already asking for heads to roll.

[homegrown terror]

There's a big fucking difference between Islam and Islamism you twat. I don't see my non-hijab wearing muslim Aunt and Uncle, who have a bisexual son, going around burning homosexuals and slaughtering children along with other family.

You sound like a member of the fucking BNP.

this. also, when was the last time you heard someone who wasn't racist use the term "racialist"?

[Flying Purple People Eater]

They may not do that but how do they treat women in general, what is the protocol in daily life? It stinks doesn't it?

No, it doesn't because 'they', my fucking family, don't treat women any fucking different. This is equivalent to calling every christian a rightist bible-thumping woman abusing racist who shoots non-white people for fun. It's simply not true.

For your information, one of my aunt's friends, a Shia muslim, has just set up a social network for lone migrant and refugee women so that they can have a support base for housing, jobs or if they are abused, unlike many of the jingoist bastards in this thread telling the 'Dagestani and chechen people' to stop 'invading the greatest country in the world'. She certainly isn't a slave to her husband, veiling herself all day and refusing to shake hands with men.

Do you actually know any muslims, or are you just basing this off of what you hear about eastern Afghanistan or something?

[hatzel]

They may not do that but how do they treat women in general, what is the protocol in daily life? It stinks doesn't it?

This is unabashed Islamophobia and absolutely unacceptable for a supposed leftist.

BA's really gotta start stamping down on this kind of crap. Do it. Do it now...

[GPDP]

I don't usually ask for this, but I think it might be wise to lock this thread for now. Emotions are at an all-time high, and people are flaming the shit out of each other out of the slightest difference in opinion. This is not a conducive environment for debate.

[hatzel]

Calm down, it's just a question.

It's not actually a question, though, is it? Making a statement of what you clearly consider to be an absolute certainty (that somebody's being a Muslim means they're also a massive sexist and that their treatment of women must 'stink') and then slapping a question mark on the end doesn't constitute a question. In fact the very meaning of the phrase 'doesn't it?' is a presupposition that what preceded it is, in fact, truthful, in the exact same way that my using 'is it?' at the end of the first sentence wasn't really a question, but an implied statement...


prej·u·dice
n.
1.

a. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

b. A preconceived preference or idea.
2. The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions. See Synonyms at predilection.
3. Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.
4. Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.
tr.v. prej·u·diced, prej·u·dic·ing, prej·u·dic·es
1. To cause (someone) to judge prematurely and irrationally. See Synonyms at bias.
2. To affect injuriously or detrimentally by a judgment or an act.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I don't usually ask for this, but I think it might be wise to lock this thread for now. Emotions are at an all-time high, and people are flaming the shit out of each other out of the slightest difference in opinion. This is not a conducive environment for debate.

Agreed.

Thread Temporarily closed until l'Enfermé logs back in or the other mods can discuss what to do about this mess.

Everyone else cool down.

If and when the thread is re-opened this is also a Blanket Verbal Warning against the use of bigoted language.

This is a discussion website, not simply talk amongst friends, use of terms such as "faggot" and "twat" are not acceptable. That means you, Aleksandr Karelin, the internet is indifferent to where any of us are coming from personally and so using words interpersonally is totally different than using them on a public forum. Women can not use terms like "slut" or "*****" on this website despite how common and generally accepted it is among female friends, and "faggot" is not acceptable either, for all we know you could be a homophobe trolling.

[l'Enfermé]

Thank you JH, what a mess this thread has turned into!

Now that we've had a time-out, maybe everyone is going to calm down and follow the rules? I'm unlocking the thread. Any further rule-breaking will be met with infractions, you have been warned. Stay on-topic.

[brigadista]

reported here that brothers' dad has said that FBI spoke to older brother after the bombings - also that the boy may not be able to speak due to his injuries

http://www.channel4.com/news/boston-bombings-questions-raised-by-telephone-call-claim

[Devrim]

A) as a queer person I reserve the right to not like muslims because they hold views against me and I am against religion and people who would beat, kill or just simply hate me for being how I was born, Why would I not have a phobia (be sacred of) people who identify as muslims, when in their holy book it says to kill me?

It says exactly the same thing in the Christian holy book too, and people directly influenced by Christian religion are enacting some pretty horrific anti-gay laws in Africa. It seem though that we are always hearing about Muslims being anti-gay though.

In reality of course, most people don't do all of the things that their religion insists on. Despite the fact that the bible, says some pretty horrific things about what should happen to gays, lots of Christians don't put these policies into effect.

Surprisingly the same thing is not true of Muslims. Of course, nowhere could be as progressive on these issues as the US, and Muslims are all bloodthirsty fanatics who want to murder gays, which would explain exactly why homosexuality was decriminalised in the Ottoman Empire* in 1858, whereas in progressive America, Illinois, the first state to remove its sodomy laws from its legal code, didn't do so until 1961, over one hundred years after those gay hating barbarians had done so.

Oh, that doesn't quite fit with the narrative, does it?

Devrim

*The Ottoman Empire at this point covered most of the non African modern Arab states.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

It says exactly the same thing in the Christian holy book too, and people directly influenced by Christian religion are enacting some pretty horrific anti-gay laws in Africa. It seem though that we are always hearing about Muslims being anti-gay though.

In reality of course, most people don't do all of the things that their religion insists on. Despite the fact that the bible, says some pretty horrific things about what should happen to gays, lots of Christians don't put these policies into effect.

Surprisingly the same thing is not true of Muslims. Of course, nowhere could be as progressive on these issues as the US, and Muslims are all bloodthirsty fanatics who want to murder gays, which would explain exactly why homosexuality was decriminalised in the Ottoman Empire* in 1858, whereas in progressive America, Illinois, the first state to remove its sodomy laws from its legal code, didn't do so until 1961, over one hundred years after those gay hating barbarians had done so.

Oh, that doesn't quite fit with the narrative, does it?

Devrim

*The Ottoman Empire at this point covered most of the non African modern Arab states.


I actually pointed out christians are massacring people in Africa in four posts in this thread.

You seem to not address the points. On libcom did you not say your girlfriend said good when 9/11 happened ?

You clearly have no dog in this fight. LOL

My point is when a christian does something we blame them as a person and say their ideology is disgusting. When a muslim kills innocent people, America instantly talks about foreign policy and islamophobia. The point was obvious and is a pretty common thing on the left.

[Comrade Nasser]

I actually pointed out christians are massacring people in Africa in four posts in this thread.

You seem to not address the points. On libcom did you not say your girlfriend said good when 9/11 happened ?

You clearly have no dog in this fight. LOL

I don't even...

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSNRcUd66PsZa6PyDkx8vsSHv78u-KsocL82IBhuCbLz9H1HWF1

[Aleksandr Karelin]

I don't even...

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSNRcUd66PsZa6PyDkx8vsSHv78u-KsocL82IBhuCbLz9H1HWF1

I have conted about 6 one liners and no actual content. Are you sure you are a communist? Do you have any theories of your own or do you not venture that far?

[Devrim]

You seem to not address the points. On libcom did you not say your girlfriend said good when 9/11 happened ?

You clearly have no dog in this fight. LOL

Yes, I did say that. It was my totally atheistic really anti-religion girlfriend who said this. Certainly not somebody backing it because of religion.

The thing I choose to address here was the point about gays, but to take it onto the other point, what you would probably consider a surprisingly large amount of people across the Middle East, not only Muslims, but also people of different and no-religion, resent American interference in the region, and the shocking atrocities that have been perpetuated against people by the US, and the other imperialist powers. Lots of people thought that on 9/11 America got what it deserved. Now, I don't at all endorse this view nor have I ever endorsed it. I am simply acknowledging that it exists, and that not everybody who holds it is a 'Muslim loony'.

Devrim

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Yes, I did say that. It was my totally atheistic really anti-religion girlfriend who said this. Certainly not somebody backing it because of religion.

The thing I choose to address here was the point about gays, but to take it onto the other point, what you would probably consider a surprisingly large amount of people across the Middle East, not only Muslims, but also people of different and no-religion, resent American interference in the region, and the shocking atrocities that have been perpetuated against people by the US, and the other imperialist powers. Lots of people thought that on 9/11 America got what it deserved. Now, I don't at all endorse this view nor have I ever endorsed it. I am simply acknowledging that it exists, and that not everybody who holds it is a 'Muslim loony'.

Devrim


If someone identifies as a facist I hate them. Even if they are not well versed in economic theory or believe only a small percentage of what their movement espouses.

Well Islam espouses horrific shit and so does christianity, however Islam is clearly the most prevalent religious force killing people for ideology, obviously imperialism stunting third world economies and such leads young poor people to join. This does not mean I can not hate those men. I hate hitler, He was living in poverty in a climate of anti semitism, do you want to start telling me how jewish people have backwards views too?

[Deity]

reported here that brothers' dad has said that FBI spoke to older brother after the bombings - also that the boy may not be able to speak due to his injuries

http://www.channel4.com/news/boston-bombings-questions-raised-by-telephone-call-claim

Is this entire situation not seeming sketchy to you all? There were also reports that their mother had said the FBI had been in constant contact with the eldest son for ~5 years.

I'm not screaming conspiracy, but the way this is all playing out is pretty strange; very hard to tell what to believe.

[Comrade Nasser]

I have conted about 6 one liners and no actual content. Are you sure you are a communist? Do you have any theories of your own or do you not venture that far?

Why should I bother arguing with someone who has no idea wtf he is talking about.

http://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/cat-jokes-funny-one-liners.jpg

[Fourth Internationalist]

I actually pointed out christians are massacring people in Africa in four posts in this thread.

Should we kill all the Christians and Moslems, aka 3.7 billion people? I mean, if all 3.7 billions people are murdering everyone else, surely it is more moral to stop them, yes?


My point is when a christian does something we blame them as a person and say their ideology is disgusting. And the material conditions that led to them becoming so radical.


When a muslim kills innocent people, America instantly talks about foreign policy and islamophobia. The point was obvious and is a pretty common thing on the left.No, America is a conservative hell-hole that blames it on all Moslems which is why many Moslems (and Sikhs, btw) got murdered after 9/11 because people like you instantly blame all Moslems. Anyways, it is important to understand the ideology and how the person got to the ideology, rather than saying "They want to kill us because their ideology says so". A very important question is why they followed that ideology in the first place, and the reason for most Middle Eastern terrorists adhering to that ideology and becoming radical is either the result of foreign policy of imperialist countries or indoctrination by their parents because the parents themselves were affected by something, and in modern times that is the current imperialism in the Mid East. However, no one is saying that makes these ideologies okay or good, as you say we are. We already know that radical Islam and pretty much all the Abrahamic religions are filled with horrible stuff, that's why probably most of us are atheists or agnostics.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Why should I bother arguing with someone who has no idea wtf he is talking about.

http://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/cat-jokes-funny-one-liners.jpg

99 percent of the world disagrees with revleft. Why bother espousing revolution. Are you ten?If I am dumb, why post things in reply. I really don't think you have any grasp on ANY political theory at all. All you seem to know is you identify as communist. Are you a worker?

On my ignore list. two 14 year olds now lol.

[Comrade Nasser]

Is this entire situation not seeming sketchy to you all? There were also reports that their mother had said the FBI had been in constant contact with the eldest son for ~5 years.

I'm not screaming conspiracy, but the way this is all playing out is pretty strange; very hard to tell what to believe.

I thought they only spoke to the eldest brother back in 2011?

[Aleksandr Karelin]

If someone identifies as a facist I hate them. Even if they are not well versed in economic theory or believe only a small percentage of what their movement espouses.

Well Islam espouses horrific shit and so does christianity, however Islam is clearly the most prevalent religious force killing people for ideology, obviously imperialism stunting third world economies and such leads young poor people to join. This does not mean I can not hate those men. I hate hitler, He was living in poverty in a climate of anti semitism, do you want to start telling me how jewish people have backwards views too?

Devrim?

[Comrade Nasser]

99 percent of the world disagrees with revleft. Why bother espousing revolution. Are you ten?If I am dumb, why post things in reply. I really don't think you have any grasp on ANY political theory at all. All you seem to know is you identify as communist. Are you a worker?

On my ignore list. two 14 year olds now lol.

>Implying that you know anything about anything

[Fourth Internationalist]

Well Islam espouses horrific shit and so does christianity, however Islam is clearly the most prevalent religious force killing people for ideology, obviously imperialism stunting third world economies and such leads young poor people to join. This does not mean I can not hate those men.

Of course you can hate terrorists, but simply hating Moslems, such as friends of mine who I care about who are the nicest people I know, is entirely different.


I hate hitler, He was living in poverty in a climate of anti semitism, do you want to start telling me how jewish people have backwards views too?

The cause of anti-semitism was not the result of Jewish people but of scapegoating by non-Jews. Now, Hitler was born into a culture where the Jews were blamed (anti-semitism), plus he went through tough economic times and the loss of Germany in WWI. So take the two together and you get "blame the Jews for tough economic times and the loss of WWI".

[Comrade Nasser]

Somewhat back on topic:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/21/17848814-charges-likely-sunday-for-boston-marathon-bombing-suspect?lite

[Fourth Internationalist]

99 percent of the world disagrees with revleft. Why bother espousing revolution.

You should have told that to those who who were pro-gay and anti-racist in the 19th century. I mean, like, 99% of the world was against them. Why did they waste their time fighting for such a cause that would never occur? Oh wait...

EDIT: I like being on his ignore list. He can't reply to me anymore, while everyone else can see my replies to his 'arguments'. He-he! :D

[Taters]

99 percent of the world disagrees with revleft. Why bother espousing revolution.

So, alright, you come to a site named Revleft and on the logo of this site, it reads "Home of the Revolutionary Left." With that in mind, you post this... and you wonder why people are calling you a troll. It's a wonder that you haven't been restricted yet, as you've shown yourself to be quite the reactionary (and an annoying, shitposting one at that).

[Aleksandr Karelin]

So, alright, you come to a site named Revleft and on the logo of this site, it reads "Home of the Revolutionary Left." With that in mind, you post this... and you wonder why people are calling you a troll.

I know communists in real life and on other sites who agree. some wo are on here. They agree but don't say because of obvious reasons, such as some weird need to try and ban people who hate a religeon that wants to kill gays and advocates slavery. You can not be a muslim and a materialist. you can not be progressive and believe in islam.

The revolutionary stance is against Islam. The reactionary one is have some weird defense of it because imperialism is in muslim territory to retrieve oil and to make capitalists rich through selling weapons etc etc.

I have never met an Anarchist or leftist in real life who did not hate islam. I have met plenty of liberals who defend it in a way they would never defend christianity though.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I know communists in real life and on other sites who agree. some wo are on here. They agree but don't say because of obvious reasons, such as some weird need to try and ban people who hate a religeon that wants to kill gays and advocates slavery. You can not be a muslim and a materialist. you can not be progressive and believe in islam.

The revolutionary stance is against Islam. The reactionary one is have some weird defense of it because imperialism is in muslim territory to retrieve oil and to make capitalists rich through selling weapons etc etc.

I have never met an Anarchist or leftist in real life who did not hate islam. I have met plenty of liberals who defend it in a way they would never defend christianity though.

Still waiting for where someone said Islam is a revolutionary ideology and is not reactionary but Christianity is. Also, waiting for the evidence that all Moslems and religious people are evil terrorists. *waiting* :laugh:

[Taters]

I have never met an Anarchist or leftist in real life who did not hate islam. I have met plenty of liberals who defend it in a way they would never defend christianity though.

Yet, you consistently miss the point. No one here is "defending" Islam. We were discussing the causes of why someone might turn to a radical version of it.

[Comrade Nasser]

This pretty much sums up Aleksandr Karlins belief system about religion:

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_losxow0Occ1qbq86qo1_500.jpg

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Yet, you consistently miss the point. No one here is "defending" Islam. We were discussing the causes of why someone might turn to a radical version of it.

Yeah, I know. Do you do that about fascists and oteghr groups to the same extent? If you went into the antifascism section right now, you would see no, you do not.

[brigadista]

just putting my opinion here - religion is a personal matter - when acts of violence are done in the name of ANY religion its ALWAYS about something else

[Fourth Internationalist]

Yeah, I know. Do you do that about fascists and oteghr groups to the same extent? If you went into the antifascism section right now, you would see no, you do not.

When talking about famous fascists, such as Hitler, or the present situation in Greece with Golden Dawn, I hear people talk about what is causing such growth in anti-immigrant/racist movements all the time. You've only been here for about 2 days, you know nothing.

[Taters]

Yeah, I know. Do you do that about fascists and oteghr groups to the same extent? If you went into the antifascism section right now, you would see no, you do not.

So, this means we sympathize with it and that we "defend" it? :rolleyes:

It was being discussed in the first place because of the racism and jingoism it summons up in some Americans.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

[QUOTE=Taters;2610269]So, this means we sympathize with it and that we "defend" it? :rolleyes:

It was being discussed in the first place because of the racism and jingoism it summons up in some Americans.[/Q

If a fascist group bombed the subway and people were going out attacking self identified fascists and stereotyping fascists as evil would you condemn it? Well then if so you have a disparity. Islam is an ideology, you are not born with it like sexuality or skin colour.

So why is it ok to stereotype white intolerant assholes but now ones who are predominantly brown? Because of identity politics and shitty politics?

[roy]

What's with fascist/Muslim comparisons? Fascists are exclusively on about classism, arbitrary authoritarianism, nationalism and usually racism. It's impossible to say anything like that about Muslims.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

What's with fascist/Muslim comparisons? Fascists are exclusively on about classism, arbitrary authoritarianism, nationalism and usually racism. It's impossible to say anything like that about Muslims.

Their holy texts advocate slavery, hate crimes and killing kaffir. That seems about the same.

[roy]

Their holy texts advocate slavery, hate crimes and killing kaffir. That seems about the same.

Well if every single Muslim had the same literal interpretation of the Qur'an you'd have a point. But that couldn't be further from the truth so...

[Aleksandr Karelin]

Well if every single Muslim had the same literal interpretation of the Qur'an you'd have a point. But that couldn't be further from the truth so...

Not every fascist agrees on points. You are building strawmen dude.

[Comrade Nasser]

Their holy texts advocate slavery, hate crimes and killing kaffir. That seems about the same.

Actually Islam is very anti-racist and promotes the mixing of races. It calls for all the races of the world to mix and fall under the banner of the islamic caliphate. Go to the middle east. There are almost no pure Arabs there. Many Arabs including my family and friends all have mixed children and they are completely accepted by Arab & Muslim society my cousin just married a fillipino women and they have the most beautiful baby together.

Could you please explain to me what these "hate crimes" are? Slavery? Perhaps you could show me where they advocate the killing of kaffirs and advocate slavery? Hmm? You probably can't.

[Per Levy]

Islam is an ideology

no, its a religion.


Their holy texts advocate slavery, hate crimes and killing kaffir. That seems about the same.

so? the bible does so as well, the tora probally too and what does that mean for the avarage muslim/christian/jew today? nothing, do you know any muslims who advocate slavery? i never did not even on the interent. so what is the point?

[roy]

Not every fascist agrees on points. You are building strawmen dude.

Not every little thing, no. But they're a marginal group of wingnuts that advocate nationalist crap. People are generally not raised fascist either. You will find nowhere near the same diversity of opinion. It's a silly comparison.

Actually silly doesn't cut it: it's a really, horribly ridiculous comparison.

[Aleksandr Karelin]

no, its a religion.



so? the bible does so as well, the tora probally too and what does that mean for the avarage muslim/christian/jew today? nothing, do you know any muslims who advocate slavery? i never did not even on the interent. so what is the point?

Actually yes, someone I trained with said gay people were subhuman and should either be killed or have the rights of chattle. I also have a very close girlfriend who is from a Muslim family and when they found out she was Lesbian her dad smacked her around and they kicked her out the house. Also how many fascists advocate genocide in real life or on the internet, they use code words like racial pride and such, they are smart enough to mask the entirety of their views. Both are the same in this regard.

[goalkeeper]

God, some of the "materialism" in this thread is so vulgar. People seem intent on treating Islamism and its adherents as mere passive objects, reacting blindly to US imperialism. Come on, at least give these guys some agency. The way these so-called "materialist" arguments are presented portrays Islamists as meek and unthinking; merely victims who react to external forces. It infantalises them, denying them even the perverse dignity of responsibility for their own actions, and having their own internally coherent political agenda.

[Per Levy]

do you know any muslims who advocate slavery?

Actually yes...

well you didnt show me a muslim who advocates slavery, you did show me that there are muslims who are homophobes, i do know that these people exist, its sad, still most people homophobes i've met where christians or even atheists/agnostics, heck i even met people who claimed to commies and were homophobes. again, that is all bad what does that tell me? that all commies, christians, jews, muslims and so on are homophobes?

but seriously, lets make it simple: do you think that 1,8 billion muslims are all out to get you and try to murder you because you are queer? do you think that said 1,8 billion muslims all want to kill everyone who dont share their religion?

[goalkeeper]

This pretty much sums up Aleksandr Karlins belief system about religion:

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_losxow0Occ1qbq86qo1_500.jpg

Anyone who calls Brevik's a "Christian terrorist" clearly knows little about his ideology and motives. He may have seen himself as defending Christian Europe from the Islamic hordes and such nonsense, but Christianity was no where near central to his world view or underpinned his ideology.

[Rafiq]

Ah, I see, so you're going to ban me for not liking my hometown turned into Baghdad.

I can't believe I'm reading this. I can't believe how moronic a person can be.

[Comrade Nasser]

Anyone who calls Brevik's a "Christian terrorist" clearly knows little about his ideology and motives. He may have seen himself as defending Christian Europe from the Islamic hordes and such nonsense, but Christianity was no where near central to his world view or underpinned his ideology.

Yeah you're right. He was more of a white nationalist storm front loser and he probably saw his despicable disgusting actions as "saving europe". Scum without a heart that's what Brevik is.

[Comrade Nasser]

Actually yes, someone I trained with said gay people were subhuman and should either be killed or have the rights of chattle. I also have a very close girlfriend who is from a Muslim family and when they found out she was Lesbian her dad smacked her around and they kicked her out the house. Also how many fascists advocate genocide in real life or on the internet, they use code words like racial pride and such, they are smart enough to mask the entirety of their views. Both are the same in this regard.
This thread died a long time ago.

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/abandon-thread-gif-cats.gif

[cynicles]

Karelin seems to be missusing a lot of words in a very liberal idealism fashion, and I have to agree with goalkeeper about the crass materialism. Also you people need to read Joseph Massad's "Desiring Arabs" to make a good counter argument against Karelin cause he really doesn't understand shit about sexuality and Islam.

[Rafiq]

Since you want to talk about Arabs, what do you think about their involvement in the African slave trade for hundreds of years before Europeans, and their mistreatment of migrant workers?

I'm not racist against Arabs, but they aren't saints.

The very fact that you categorize Arabs not only as a homogeneous group with objectively similar characteristics and interests, but also as an ethnic group which must bare responsibilities, of whom are categorized with and identified with, for humans before them merely by right of genetic lineage signifies you are a reactionary. By categorizing "arabs" as a people who are genetically bound to be accountable for something like the African slave trade, you de-humanize them and not only do they become an "other" which you can patronize, but another species all together.

Maybe, just maybe, something like the slave trade in Arabia was a phenomena of which was a result of very complex social relations existent within the existent mode of production, shared almost on a universal level by other slave societies and not something intrinsic to "the Arabs". You're incompetence in formulating even a mediocre form of a class analysis (after all, was it all the 'Arabs' who thrived from and directly engaged in the slave trade, or the Arabian ruling class?). The very category itself that you call "the arabs" does not exist, for the 'Arab people', like all other people (GASP) are organized into very complicated social and class relations which react upon superstructural formations to create even more meta-social complications and divisions. The BA will do well to completely ban you from this site, if they even the most rudimentary means to conceptualize a grade-A chauvinist.

[Rafiq]

done.

[Fourth Internationalist]

God, some of the "materialism" in this thread is so vulgar. People seem intent on treating Islamism and its adherents as mere passive objects, reacting blindly to US imperialism. Come on, at least give these guys some agency. The way these so-called "materialist" arguments are presented portrays Islamists as meek and unthinking; merely victims who react to external forces. It infantalises them, denying them even the perverse dignity of responsibility for their own actions, and having their own internally coherent political agenda.

No one here believes that, you know. When specifically discussing the material conditions that lead to them becoming Islamists, there is not a need to discuss how bad those people are. I would think the fact that they're terrorists would imply to everyone reading this thread that revolutionary leftists don't sympathize with what they did because they were 'forced to' by material conditions.

[Jimmie Higgins]

My point is when a christian does something we blame them as a person and say their ideology is disgusting. When a muslim kills innocent people, America instantly talks about foreign policy and islamophobia. The point was obvious and is a pretty common thing on the left.

No, this argument is based on a straw-man version of our positions - a straw-man that echos similar claims by the right-wing about leftist politics.

First, morality of the thing being examined, while important on a basic level, is not politically clarifying. Anyone killed in conflicts or whatnot is a waste and human tragedy - but this understanding only reveals that we are all humans and all mortal, it doesn't tell us much about why or how such things happen, and therefore it doesn't tell us much about how things might be different.

So when revolutionaries of a working class nature look at acts like "terrorism" then trying to understand it is important. Let's take a simple example and break it down:

If a prodestant terrorist blows up some Catholics in Northern Ireland on the one hand and a Catholic or Nationalist terrorist blows up some prodestants, then what's the common factor behind such things irregardless of agreeing with the tactic or not? It's the oppression of the Catholics in both cases. But for one side, they are driven by a desire to preserve or expand this oppression (effectively or ineffectivly, morally or immorally). For the catholic terrorist, again (effectively or ineffectively, morally or immorally) they are driven by a desire ultimately to be rid of this oppression - even if their politics and tactics are ineffective.

So 9/11 happened because Bin Lauden identifies the US as the biggest oppressor in the world and he relates this in his own religious and ideological framework. So, the lowest common denominator is that identification, in a warped way, of US as supporting puppet dictators and Israel. His tactics and politics are not going to bring liberation, in fact 9/11 only gave the US an opportunity to become more aggressive. But without US imperialism, there would have been no 9/11. Without Islam, guess what, big imperial powers still get hit with terrorist attacks.

Now, so what's the difference between a right-wing racist terrorist? Well if a racist blows up a Black Church, he will claim it is because he is being "oppressed" by black people - but this is not actually the case in society and really what he describes as "oppression" is actually more equality which he feels is a threat to the crumbs he can currently grab onto in US society. So he is fighting to preserve what he sees as the "natural" order of things with whites being socially above blacks. If some black nationalist went on a rampage, what is the underlying reason - like the racist, the underlying reason is the existance of racial inequality in society. Except for one, they want to get rid of it and for the other they want to preserve it.

So it's not a matter of morals, but of understanding the social causes of these things. And the left spends as much time analyzing fascists and racists as it does in looking into the reasons for various forms of resistance, or the violent acts of oppressed people.


Yeah, I know. Do you do that about fascists and oteghr groups to the same extent? If you went into the antifascism section right now, you would see no, you do not.

Yes, the left does and has spent a great deal of time trying to understand fascism:

LEON TROTSKY: FASCISM
(http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1944/1944-fas.htm) What It Is and How To Fight It (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1944/1944-fas.htm)


And as one last point, you compare Islam to fascism and Christianity to fascism and so therefore, I guess, fascism and Christianity. And yet how do we understand actual fascist countries and movememnts that used Christianity as the basis for their ideology - like in some Eastern European countries and Spain (maybe Italy, but I'm honestly not that familiar, I think while they may have been supportive of Catholicism as sort of a national pride and culture thing, I think they were more straight nationalist in their propaganda)? Or what about US fascist groups that use Christianity as the basis? If religion is already and ideology, and if it is as bad as fascism, how do we distinguish between the Christian Coalition in the Republicans (which I think most would say, while reactionary, is not fascist) and white power Christian Identity movements and whatnot?

Religion is not ideology in the same sense - particularly because ideology develops out of particular class world-views whereas religion tends to always have various ideological currents within it because religion is adopted or viewed by people in different classes very differently. Christianity was a liberation force according to John Brown or Nat Turner (both said God told them the kill slaveowners) but the same religion was used to justify slavery for the Slave-owning elites.

[Os Cangaceiros]

One still must identify what exactly constitutes "oppression", though...in some cases it's quite clear & universally accepted by just about everyone (people who were enslaved were oppressed, for example), in other cases it's murkier.

Furthermore such an analysis taken purely by itself doesn't really give a satisfactory answer to how someone like bin Laden, when you consider his family background, became a leader of al-Qaeda, and not someone who grew up in a refugee camp. Or the so-called "underwear bomber", who's father was very wealthy, or any number of other examples.

[Jimmie Higgins]

One still must identify what exactly constitutes "oppression", though...in some cases it's quite clear & universally accepted by just about everyone (people who were enslaved were oppressed, for example), in other cases it's murkier.Well I think that's why, for example, there is currently little discussion in the anti-fascist pages here of what fascism is - we take it for granted that it supports the oppression of worker's movements and radicals and so there's little discussion. When the Tea-party happened, however, there was a lot of endless discussion here of what the social roots of it are, if it's fascism, why it developed, and so on.

No one would claim that by saying, "well there is a segment of the population which feels threatened because of the crisis but also fears disorder to the social hierarchy" we are giving a pass to right-wing fanatics.


Furthermore such an analysis taken purely by itself doesn't really give a satisfactory answer to how someone like bin Laden, when you consider his family background, became a leader of al-Qaeda, and not someone who grew up in a refugee camp. Or the so-called "underwear bomber", who's father was very wealthy, or any number of other examples.Well my examples were purposefully simplified. Bin Laden could grow up anytime and have the same motivations, but without US (and Russian) Imperialism he never would have had a chance to develop a following and build an organization.

Are people like this ideologically driven? Sure - but is that ideology "Islam" or "Christianity" abstractly or whatnot?

[barbelo]

Sadly, I got late to this discussion.

I'll only add a point: I live in a northern european city and as many others, it's a city with a great, great amount of immigrants. Imagine for example Amsterdam, where more than half of the population isn't actually dutch.
A dream of multiculturalism, of many different peoples living side by side, right? Actually it was the city were Theo Van Gogh was murdered by a muslim.

I really see muslims being stereotyped by the media, by politicians, by certain countries foreign policies; but at the same time South America also had Nato backed dictatorships and they doesn't go around blowing up things, and you never saw zoroastrians creating so much social unrest even when they were a segregated minority, and gosh you can't even imagine how persecuted zoroastrians were during history, to the point of losing all kinds of political structure. So... It makes a sense to pick muslims a part and group all of them inside an amorphous and vague group.

Going back to the point, in this same northern european societies we see politicians masking their discourse with marxism and socialism, advocating for immigration and for cultural homogeneity. But this discourse is only a false consciousness, it only pushes a middle and upper class interest of mainting the capitalistic economy and preventing a labour shortage, because the population is aging and not having kids. Under this discourse muslims are painted as noble savages, as eternal and helpless victims. People who doesn't share this vision- not because they are like Breivik and believe in a retarded "death of the white race", but because they care about their security and others trivial things- are labeled as right wing extremists.
I'm not saying that racist and xenophobic views should be excused, but I'm saying that a balance should be found in the Left between this view of the noble savage and the all-evil terrorist who needs guns and fries; because as things are now or either people are extremely incoherent and contradictory, or people are the useful idiots for external forces. The boston attack is the biggest example: an attack which was probably funded or organized by an external power to Chechens, probably related to Russia (who bought off all chechen leadership) or Iran, and yet people lose themselves into these dumb discussions, labeling each other fascists, among other things. Like when people talk about Israel, isn't a productive debate, it's just a waste of time, nothing is proposed, no point is reached; a thing which Nick Cohen greatly address in the book What's left?.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I really see muslims being stereotyped by the media, by politicians, by certain countries foreign policies; but at the same time South America also had Nato backed dictatorships and they doesn't go around blowing up things, and you never saw zoroastrians creating so much social unrest even when they were a segregated minority, and gosh you can't even imagine how persecuted zoroastrians were during history, to the point of losing all kinds of political structure. So... It makes a sense to pick muslims a part and group all of them inside an amorphous and vague group.

Going back to the point, in this same northern european societies we see politicians masking their discourse with marxism and socialism, advocating for immigration and for cultural homogeneity. But this discourse is only a false consciousness, it only pushes a middle and upper class interest of mainting the capitalistic economy and preventing a labour shortage, because the population is aging and not having kids. Under this discourse muslims are painted as noble savages, as eternal and helpless victims. People who doesn't share this vision- not because they are like Breivik and believe in a retarded "death of the white race", but because they care about their security and others trivial things- are labeled as right wing extremists.

I strongly disagree. The capitalists do, and have at various times, needed influxes of labor - this is epsecially true in the Americas. In the US, this encouraging of immigration historically has also come with demonization of immigrants from the top of society - the same people who need that immigrant labor ultimately. This seems contradictory but is useful in two main ways: scapegoating and drving down wages.

The scapgoating of immigrants in the US history has at least two main functions IMO. For one, it's a divide and rule thing where because workers already have to compete, the media, politicians, and industrialists can push the blame of lowering wages away from profit-seeking and exploitation and onto black or okiee migrants or European and Asian and now Mexican, Central American, and South American groups. The social oppression and legal indifference to the demonized group of workers also allows employers more leeway in treating these workers poorly and increasing exploitation through lower wages or longer hours.

Second, and more sharply, in times of economic contraction, this sort of simmering divide-and-rule becomes much more agressive as now the ruling class needs to reduce the workforce and probably increase exploitation on the remaining workers to a greater extent. In the US this has meant that every recession has tended to come with a lot of anti-chineese, anti-irish/polish/jewish/itallian, anti-latino hysteria - at least as far back as the first great depression in the late 1800s. The chineese in California were segregated and excluded from large parts of the economy and were specifically barred from immigrating and even though they were a tiny tiny fraction of the population, newspapers created "yellow peril" scares where they blamed working class downward mobility on this maybe 1% of the Californian working class in a time of depression.

In the neoliberal era industrial powers from the US to Europe to China have needed an influx of workers (internally, from rural areas, mostly when it comes to China). In North America and in Europe scapegoating rural people moving to industrial areas of Mexico, Latin Americans immigranting to the US helps the capitalists not only gain labor, but, considering the large surpluss labor housed in US prisons, it is also central to creating pressures of downward mobility (which the reserve labor in prisons also helps to do for the US). People who want to bar immigration or blame immigrants on this are fighting over crumbs at best, but it would do NOTHING, if they achieved any actual reduction in immigration, to alliviate the need of capital right now to destroy post-war living standards and expectations. Capitalists would still need to drive down our wages because that's the situation that capitalism is in now and that's what competition looks like: lower US wages to increse domestic manufacturing to compete with China and Europe, and Russia, but mostly China.

The only thing that might alter that course is if workers effectivly block these attempts to drive down wages, and social wages and benifits. When anti-immigrant politics seeks to bar some of the class from these benifits, then the ability of the capitalists to create that pressure in a "race to the bottom" in wages remains. The alternative is a more united class resistance to this increased exploitation and that means fighting for full equality - such as it is - for workers no matter where they are born or where they come from.

If we tried to equivocate on this or find common ground with anti-immigrant workers, then we'd be making the same mistakes as the right-wing of the US Socialist Party in supporting restrictions on Chineese immigrants and black migrants. The old term for such politics is "social-chauvanism".

Just a couple of random points:

- As far as Latin America and imperialism, I suggest reading about the 1980s or Colombia or Pinnochette or the various rather ruthless and bloody national liberation struggles there. In the US, "terrorism" in modern times was associated with Latin American revolutionaries the ANC and Iranian revolutionaries, not specifically Islam until fairly recently, and then explicitly after 9/11.

Here's a chart of "terrorist attacks" on US businesses, dipliomatic offices, and military from a right-wing think tank:
http://www.heritage.org/~/media/Images/Reports/2011/05/sr93/sr93_chart6.ashx?w=500&h=620&as=1

[Os Cangaceiros]

I really see muslims being stereotyped by the media, by politicians, by certain countries foreign policies; but at the same time South America also had Nato backed dictatorships and they doesn't go around blowing up things

There were various left-wing underground/terrorist groups that were operational in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay etc during the dictatorship years.

[Rafiq]

There were various left-wing underground/terrorist groups that were operational in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay etc during the dictatorship years.

Indeed, the difference was that the U.S. was successful in destroying the middle eastern left via islamist groups.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Luís Henrique]

As far as Latin America and imperialism, I suggest reading about the 1980s or Colombia or Pinnochette or the various rather ruthless and bloody national liberation struggles there. In the US, "terrorism" in modern times was associated with Latin American revolutionaries the ANC and Iranian revolutionaries, not specifically Islam until fairly recently, and then explicitly after 9/11.

True. The current hysteria about Islam is a very recent phenomenon. Those of us who are over 40 may remember a time when "terrorist" was a code word for "Marxist", not "Muslim" (even in predominantly Muslim countries; in the 70's, when one thought of "Arab terrorism" one would quite certainly think of the PLO or PFLP or DFLP, all of them secular - and "Marxist" or more probably "marxistoid" organisations). Those of us who are even older, or have read more old books, may remember a time in which Islam was stereotyped as an extremely conformist and fatalist religion, which in the imperialist discourse of the times "explained" the extremely low level of resistance in predominantly Muslim countries. Or, if one thinks the "good old times" were the 70s not of the 20th, but of the 19th century, one would remember of times when "terrorism" (though the word wasn't as popular at the time) mean anarchist militancy.

We tend to have a very short memory of those things (Bertrand Russel once joked that the French apparently lost the habit of "eating frogs" when they became allies of Britain in the early 20th century). We should be thougher in opposing the massification of accepted "truths".

One thing that probably helps to explain the level of horror that Muslim terrorists elicit, however, is the use of suicide bombings, which are probably rub the wrong way very deeply ingrained conceptions of ex-Christian Enlightenment societies. As, in a much less awful way, the habit of veiling faces.

Luís Henrique

[brigadista]

where i live demonisation is the way for politicians when talking about anyone who is not a WASP - easy cheap politics

[Comrade Nasser]

where i live demonisation is the way for politicians when talking about anyone who is not a WASP - easy cheap politics

WASP? White Anglo Saxon Protestant right? Ridiculous.

[Comrade Nasser]

WASP seems like an old racist term to me. White supremacists now allow anyone in who's Christian and atheist (as they believe Judaism is an enemy and islam is pro-racemixing). Although you have to fit the mold of Stormfront's userbase (White, lower-class, bald, stupid). It's much easier for people to be racist and stupid, then to be a communist and actually use you're brain.

[tachosomoza]

WASP seems like an old racist term to me. White supremacists now allow anyone in who's Christian and atheist (as they believe Judaism is an enemy and islam is pro-racemixing). Although you have to fit the mold of Stormfront's userbase (White, lower-class, bald, stupid). It's much easier for people to be racist and stupid, then to be a communist and actually use you're brain.

WASP is a reference to the old American bourgeois and the very uppercrust of American social structure. White, Anglo-Saxon, and Protestant. Guys like Calvin Coolidge, Saltonstalls, Morgans, Vanderbilts, etc.

[barbelo]

Sorry, I lack time to trim the message and properly quote everyone.

Higgins and others, I don't think the public perception of muslims is so easy to be descontructed. I see that some of you are brazilians, do you think the brazilian left during dictatorship times can really be equated with modern muslims, people that fight wars hidden behind civilians or bomb crowded subways? Or that Brizola is the same thing as Bin Laden or Nasrallah? I don't even think this comparison is valid since one is only political while the other is political, religious and ethnic (and yes I know I was the first to make it). I'm just saying that some prejudice towards muslims have basis in reality and it's naive to see them as noble savages victims of imperialism; when they have poor brainwashed immigrants in one tip and billionaires oil oligarchs in the other, and many shared interests in between.
About shrinking economies I can't speak, I only know the reality of my surroundings and I see exactly this: immigrants who'll never be considered as equals or have any any kind of social mobility, working in utterly underpaid jobs for a geriatric population. It's like a capitalistic gulag or slave society. Labeling people who share this perception (and the disgust for such a society) as chauvinists is- at least in my lay opinion- what generates and empowers crazy reactionaries like Breivik.


where i live demonisation is the way for politicians when talking about anyone who is not a WASP - easy cheap politics

Where I live the politicians import immigrants to vote for them. If the populism doesn't exist, they bring it.

[Paul Pott]

I think it's certainly true that the left doesn't address - or doesn't want to address - the other socio economic functions of "third world" immigration to the advanced capitalist countries, but it's important that we do, because they are closely related to the crisis of capitalism in the 21st century, such as the falling rate of profit in the west and the destabilizing conditions of poverty in the third world and the threat that poses to markets worldwide. We've seen what happens when the price of food and other necessities rise too much, like they did in 2010 and 2011 in the Arab world.

[bcbm]

the terror of 'real time' (http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/22/opinion/rushkoff-media-anxiety/index.html)

are the tsarnaev brothers white? (http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/are_the_tsarnaev_brothers_white/)

[soso17]

[QUOTE=TheRedScare;2609889]

Do you tell black people if they can drop the N bomb?

I am queer, I can say faggot if I want. Also great, thanks for being a weird patronizing moron to gay people everywhere. Oh you have a gay friend, do you have black ones too :D

This is just, wow.

Well, I am also a gay man, and anyone (ANYONE) who says f****t needs to be called out on it. It's a disgusting word, and throwing it around in a flippant manner is like spitting in the face of those who fought for the rights you seem to take for granted.

Sorry if that offends your bourgeois, ACLU-like love of all free speech. Hate speech shouldn't be tolerated.

[Hermes]

I know this will sound really ignorant, and it's likely not the thread for it, but why is 'queer' an almost universally accepted word within gay culture, and I think this site, but 'faggot' is not? Is there a difference I'm missing here? I thought that reclaiming was usually understood, even if not necessarily agreed with.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I know this will sound really ignorant, and it's likely not the thread for it, but why is 'queer' an almost universally accepted word within gay culture, and I think this site, but 'faggot' is not? Is there a difference I'm missing here? I thought that reclaiming was usually understood, even if not necessarily agreed with.

I think it's frankly rather silly, word-politics in general - or at least in the absense of a social or worker's movement in which, say, use of the word "black" or "afro-american" rather than "negro" holds some symbolic connection to the power of the movememnt or political debates/divides in a movement.

But also because it's a rather slight political thing, unless there is some kind of conservative or liberal connotation to a word specifically, in the balance of things it's easy enough to just use commonly accepted terms and sort of pick which political arguments are more concretely worth making.

"Queer" and "Faggot" are used differently, "Queer" has been taken as sort of an umbrella term and this use comes from academia basically. Persoanally I find it a little hard to overcome the use of the term as a slur which is how I encountered the word growing up. I tend not to use the term, but it is widely used in universities and among LGBT activists and so I really don't make a big deal about it. "Faggot" is different because it's used sort of ironically among people, it's sort of an aknowledgement of oppression in a solidarity way among some people. I personally find it to reflect a sort of cultural pessimism about fighting oppression (the same with people using anti-black racist terms in a similar "we're all black and oppressed" sort of way) but it's just sort of a cultural thing and I know the context when someone uses the term in this way. But I would argue against using the term in a political setting because people may not know where you are coming from or it could alientate some people for not much political gain. I wouldn't insist on people not using one of these terms, but I might argue that unless there's some rehtorical reason to use it, it's not worth possibly sending the wrong impression.

With the internet, there's no easy way to really know someone's intention in using the term, and misunderstandings of tone and whatnot are common in a text-only situation, so I think the most consistant policy would be just to block terms like that.

[Luís Henrique]

Higgins and others, I don't think the public perception of muslims is so easy to be descontructed. I see that some of you are brazilians, do you think the brazilian left during dictatorship times can really be equated with modern muslims, people that fight wars hidden behind civilians or bomb crowded subways? Or that Brizola is the same thing as Bin Laden or Nasrallah? I don't even think this comparison is valid since one is only political while the other is political, religious and ethnic (and yes I know I was the first to make it). I'm just saying that some prejudice towards muslims have basis in reality and it's naive to see them as noble savages victims of imperialism; when they have poor brainwashed immigrants in one tip and billionaires oil oligarchs in the other, and many shared interests in between.

Well, I am one of the Brazilians, and no, I do not think that we can really equate the Brazilian armed left under the dictatorship with either Muslims in general or terrorists who present themselves as Muslim. Brizola was no bin Laden, and neither were Lamarca, Marighella, or Zé Dirceu.

But then I do not think there is any valid comparison between "Muslims" and "Muslim terrorists" either. And if I were to compare anyone with the modern Muslim terrorists, I would point the finger to Aum Shinrikyo or Franco Freda.

When it comes to actually point out the actual differences, however, the task becomes more difficult. Of course, the Brazilian armed left didn't target crowds - on the contrary, it earnestly tried to avoid "collateral damage", and to a great extent managed to. But then the Brazilian armed left saw itself in conflict with an internal - even if backed by foreign forces - dictatorship. It rarely, if ever, attempted actions beyond Brazilian national borders - and it did see the vast majority of the Brazilian population, middle class (after all, the class origin of most of their cadres) as allies, or as the beneficiaries of their action. So there was no logical reason for them to attack "innocent bystanders"; whether they attacked innocent people brings into discussion whether diplomats from the US or Switzerland are innocent (the most egregious action by the Brazilian armed left was the murder of a British sailor, during the visit of his ship to Brazil).

Now, it can be argued, I suppose, that such difference is due to the Brazilian armed left roots in Marxism, or the Enlightenment, or even in Christianism (and, differently from the Middle East, Latin America has a long history of accepting and emulating Enlightenment values). Certainly it would be difficult to find Marxist organisations that target common civilians in Christian/Enlightened countries. Terrorists that do such things in those countries tend to stem from the far-right variety, as already cited Franco Freda. But perhaps a more important difference is one of time. Such kind of indiscriminate attacks weren't common in the 70's, or were the privilege of established States. Nowadays they are more common, and there seems to be an increase of this kind of violence even among organisations that style themselves leftist.

Besides that, I would say that while there has been much political, and repressive interference from the imperialist centre in Latin America, it has never been able to actually wipe out the left here (and there has never been any other ideological camp that could or wanted to compete against the left for the representation of extreme dissent). Leftist parties govern many Latin American countries, and while there is of course widespread discontent with their achievements or lack thereof, they weren't demoralised and sidelined in the way secular leftism and nationalism was in the Muslim countries.

Luís Henrique

[tachosomoza]

Official complaint : U.S. v. Tsarnaev

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/137388040?width=360

http://htmlimg3.scribdassets.com/3zeszfwlc2c5enk/images/1-01bb63b152.jpg

http://htmlimg1.scribdassets.com/3zeszfwlc2c5enk/images/7-6af7a3c55c.jpg

[RadioRaheem84]

Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev informed investigators that he and his brother were not directed by a foreign terrorist organization. Instead, they were “self-radicalized” and motivated to kill, in part, by U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Washington Post reported.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/tsarnaev-condition-motive-wars-193132367.html

Motive was political. The cycle of violence continues.

[Tenka]

"A Weapon of Mass Destruction"?
Wasn't it a homemade bomb? If so, I guess they found some WMD's in Iraq after all!!!

[bcbm]

"A Weapon of Mass Destruction"?
Wasn't it a homemade bomb? If so, I guess they found some WMD's in Iraq after all!!!

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/04/tsarnaev-charged/

[dez]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/tsarnaev-condition-motive-wars-193132367.html

Motive was political. The cycle of violence continues.

I haven't seen the quoted part in the article, maybe they have removed it.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

"Student falsely accused of Bombings Commits Suicide" (http://unicornbooty.com/blog/2013/04/25/student-falsely-accused-by-reddit-for-boston-bombings-commits-suicide/#sthash.oOoVTcmN.QGTceiOL.dpbs)

[bcbm]

"Student falsely accused of Bombings Commits Suicide" (http://unicornbooty.com/blog/2013/04/25/student-falsely-accused-by-reddit-for-boston-bombings-commits-suicide/#sthash.oOoVTcmN.QGTceiOL.dpbs)

he disappeared and was probably dead for a month before boston bombing ever happened

[Comrade Nasser]

he disappeared and was probably dead for a month before boston bombing ever happened

Still horrible, nonetheless.

[Akshay!]

He left a chilling note in the boat - http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57584771/boston-bombings-suspect-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-left-note-in-boat-he-hid-in-sources-say/

The note says 3 things:
1) He doesn't mourn the death of his brother - who is in paradise.
2) He attacked because of the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan.
3) An attack on one Muslim is an attack on all Muslims.

The side of the panel of the boat said "Fuck America"
(source: wikipedia, cbsnews, tyt)