Perspective: Islamophobia Is Not Racist

Truth depends upon perspective. Yet, that does not mean there is no truth in perspectives. Global Truth? The union of true perspectives.

One perspective cannot oppose another, it complements it.

Islamophobia is just, literally speaking, the fear of Islam, an ideology. How could fear of an ideology be racist? (I am not talking about fear of people who happen to be Muslim; I have many Muslim friends! And I joke with them, instead of going below the table, trembling abjectly.)

Well fear can be racist, if fear is unjustified. Yet, with Islam, it is not.

Look at Hadith 41;685: …”Allah’s Messenger… : The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will FIGHT against the Jews and the Muslims would KILL them…”

Caliphate Salad, 9th Century. Different Before, Different After. At War, Always.

Caliphate Salad, 9th Century. Different Before, Different After. At War, Always.

[Maybe I should have used another map; this one depicts a Carolingian empire reduced to France; In truth, with its “March States”, it covered most of Western Europe; Also “Byzantium” called itself “Roman”.]

Of course, one has to know what a Hadith is. Israeli voters apparently do, and they gave Netanyahu, 50% more seats at the Knesset. The Hadith above is part of the “constitution” of Hamas.

Identifying the color of skin to race has proven genetically erroneous (even Israel recognizes this, sort of). But we are living in intellectual times. It is about the race of thoughts.

We know, perhaps, of the order of 10,000 religions which have graced humanity. Most condoned human sacrifices. All are feared and condemned by all our contemporaries, except for a handful of these 10,000 that are practiced nowadays.

Why, if 9,979 “revelation”, “prophet” based religions have proven erroneous and condemnable, those practiced today are better?

The answer is simple: the religions still in existence today have been secularized. Christianism, to roll out example number one, as practiced today, is nothing as what its founding texts make it to be. Christianism in 2015, even by its fiercest fanatics, is closer to Secularism, also known as the Republic, than to Christianism practiced and imposed by its authorities in 400 CE (when Rome was ruled by bishops: the bishop of Milan imposed his will onto emperor Theodosius, an ex-general, a very fierce mass homicidal tyrant who mad a war to philosphers).

Christianism, or, as it was then known, Catholicism, was secularized after the Franks took ever greater power between 450 CE (Attila’s invasion) and 507 CE (defeat of the Visigoths by Consul Clovis).

This went on until 1097 CE, when the invasion of the Orient by the Turks, recently converted to Islam, passed a tipping point.

Until then, Frankish counter-attacks had repelled Islamists from Southern France (they raided all the way to Switzerland, Northern Italy). A Frankish army had freed Rome from an Islamist army.

However, Islam, interpreted literally, as found in Qur’an and Hadith, is a perfect war religion. Making war into a religion (Jihad!) helped the Turks invade what was left of the “Pars Orientalis” of the Roman empire. A huge massacre of 10,000 Christian pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem, plus calls for help form the Eastern Roman government (Constantinople) launched the counter-attack of the Crusades.

Fascism is the mindset that optimizes war making. Whatever the good reasons to launch a massive crusade, it resulted immediately in the rise of massive Christianofascism. Jews east of the Vosges mountains were the first victims. The ultimate victim was philosophical Secularism: in the following centuries, Christian Fundamentalism killed millions (after warming up with tens of thousands of Jews killed, if not hundreds of thousands, Christian Fundamentalism killed a million Cathars; after that four centuries of mayhem between various Christian sects and with those who protested brought increasing mayhem.

So the rise of religious killing madness has been seen in Europe before. Twice.

The first rise of Christianofascism brought down the Roman government.

That is rather ironical. The imperial government had launched the Christian derangement to start with, so Rome was punished by its own fascist instrument.

The second rise of Christianofascism was a smoke screen behind which the secular power of rabid plutocracy hid itself. Roughly the same mechanism as the first time

And what of “Islam”, meanwhile?

Islam was specifically designed for war and conquest. That certainly was not exactly the full intent of Muhammad. But he is not the one who wrote down the Qur’an and the Hadith. Soon after his death, “Islam” became an astounding, giant war machine. The Qur’an was (mostly) written twenty years later (although some parts are even more recent).

As I said countless times, that led to war between (self-declared) Muslims (and so the many Caliphates above, and this is just one picture in time, Caliphate kept on coming, and going, all over the place).

In truth there was never an uncontested “Caliphate” (it means a succession).

The Caliphate is a myth:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/142379/nick-danforth/the-myth-of-the-caliphate.

The preceding article focuses on the Turks, who became Muslims only 1,000 years ago, and put Islam as war religion to good use, by quickly building a giant empire that put the Romans in Constantinople on the ropes.

The Caliphate was a myth, from the start. Right away, some thought Ali should have succeeded Muhammad. But Ali became only the Fourth Caliph, in an ambiance of religious war, and his sons and his followers got massacred (as Shias remember all too well).

So “Islam” never knew peace. Neither external, nor internal. At least in the Middle Earth (of course, most Muslims are in South, and South East Asia, but that is another story).

As, in the Islamist model, according to the Guide Principle (Qur’an Sura 4, verse 59), the state is identified to one man, there were never institutions, nor continuity thereof.

Contrarily to the West: the Catholic church had continuity, and even Roman administration pretty continued under the Franks, and so did Roman secular law.

So what, looking forward?

Well, maybe one should look at France. Genetic studies show many French in the South and South-West, are (partly) of Berber, and, or, Arab descent.

Muslims were not discriminated against in Europe during the recovery of invaded territory (except, tragically in Spain around 1500 CE, at the end of the Reconquista).

So the solution is to secularize. Do to Islam what was done to Christianity. And don’t go backwards, as has happened in the USA since the 1930s.

I have said this for years. The New York Times just discovered it in “A Christian Nation? Since When?”:

“AMERICA may be a nation of believers, but when it comes to this country’s identity as a “Christian nation,” our beliefs are all over the map. 

Just a few weeks ago, Public Policy Polling reported that 57 percent of Republicans favored officially making the United States a Christian nation. But in 2007, a survey by the First Amendment Center showed that 55 percent of Americans believed it already was one. 

The confusion is understandable. For all our talk about separation of church and state, religious language has been written into our political culture in countless ways. It is inscribed in our pledge of patriotism, marked on our money, carved into the walls of our courts and our Capitol. Perhaps because it is everywhere, we assume it has been from the beginning. 

But the founding fathers didn’t create the ceremonies and slogans that come to mind when we consider whether this is a Christian nation. Our grandfathers did.”

Then the New York Times exposes how American plutocracy found that the Christian god (the “Allah” of the Qur’an) was all the help they needed.

As the New York Times reveals to the baffled masses:

“Back in the 1930s, business leaders found themselves on the defensive. Their public prestige had plummeted with the Great Crash; their private businesses were under attack by Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal from above and labor from below. To regain the upper hand, corporate leaders fought back on all fronts. They waged a figurative war in statehouses and, occasionally, a literal one in the streets; their campaigns extended from courts of law to the court of public opinion. But nothing worked particularly well until they began an inspired public relations offensive that cast capitalism as the handmaiden of Christianity. 

The two had been described as soul mates before, but in this campaign they were wedded in pointed opposition to the “creeping socialism” of the New Deal.”

One should take this seriously. Islamophobia is a timely attitude, yet, Christianophobia has been neglected all too long.

The fight for secularization is also a fight against not just Christianization, or Islamization, but also against plutocracy itself.

One has also to remember that the very principle of plutocracy, a few having everything, especially power, is another description of fascism.

And that fascism is intimately related to war.

And that war arises from limited resources. Even in chimpanzees.

And that nothing will limit resources as much as climate change, acidity change, nitrogen change, and all other changes were are visiting on Earth. With a wild abandon, which plutocracy is no stranger to.

Recent pollen analysis in French beehives showed thirty-one (31) different insecticides. For some reason, French bee populations are collapsing except in remote islands, and non-chemically treated mountain areas. Bees are fundamental to the biosphere, since there are flowering plants, and they bear fruit. Verily, we need more than those fruits greed can bring.

Real seriousness is multidimensional, variegated, observant. And does not pose for a popularity contest.

Find, oh you wise ones, as many perspectives as possible, and the deepest ones, while not trusting blindly those popular yesterday.

Patrice Ayme’

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

48 Responses to “Perspective: Islamophobia Is Not Racist”

  1. gmax Says:

    Let all the myths sink!

  2. dominique deux Says:

    As usual, a wealth of information.

    You have been rejecting the politically correct distinction between Islam and Islamism. Yet everything that is politically correct is not necessarily an error. The very fact that you have Muslim friends would show that the very distinction you strafe on sight is part of your everyday judgment and behavior. Islamism and Wall St Christianity may be seen as heresies, or as reflecting the core teachings of the two creeds; that is not relevant. The relevant fact is that modern believers, in their majority, reject them. Of course Christianity is farther up that road than Islam, and more so in Europe than in the US. But secularizing both in their entirety remains a priority.

    Finally, the parallel between Wall St Christianity and Islamism is quite enlightening. Islamism could be called Bazaari Islam. Its leaders are filthy rich (or strive to become so), are deeply opposed to economic regulation, hate Socialism, and so on. Nothing is too vile in the grabbing of wealth: slavery, drug running, looting. Wall St Christians should be seeing them as blood brothers (and in truth, as the Bush Administration’s shadowy UN dealings with the House of Saud on women’s rights show, they have acted on it). Islamism is not a revolt of the disenfranchised, as some wail in soft-hearted, soft-brained feelgood hysteria; it is a plutocratic plan using the poor and the uneducated as cannon fodder – exactly as Republican billionnaires are doing with their tea-bag constituency.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Dominique: As usual, a cogent comment. True I reject the notion between Islam and Islamism, and it is not by accident that I use “Christianism” as much as possible in place of “Christianity”. When I grew up in Africa, I did not even know what “Islam” was… In the same areas, a lot of old religious ways have been forgotten, nowadays. What they had before was fully secular in all practical ways. “Islam”, meaning literal Hadith and Qur’an, Wahhabist style, is fully retrograde, and not secular compatible.

      Pure Islam, namely pure Qur’an, and, or pure Hadith, just like pure Christianism (see European Middle Ages), are not civilization compatible, and should be destroyed, just like the religion of the Aztecs, and for the same exact reasons. (“Jihad” is human sacrificing barely disguised. So were the autodafes of Christianism, and crusades, which killed millions, and certainly more than the Aztecs ever did… Although the latter could kill 80,000 in 4 days.)

      I agree that PC is not always wrong. But PC tends to replace thinking in the pseudo-intellectuals.

      PC is for “Politically Correct”, but could be for “Perfect Careerism” too. As clear as water in East Antarctica, I will show in an essay today.

      True Wall St Christianism is by no coincidence just like Islamism. The former CREATED the latter, and was put to good usage, throwing the Franco-British out of North Africa and the Middle Earth… As planned.

      Now Europe has to realize force is the solution, and ought to be applied first to Libya (as Syria is too messy). Like Italy and France have more or less proposed: find a suitable government, and then send the military to impose it.

      (The old Phoenician based civilization ought to be fully revived, though; not just because it will act as a block against Islam, but because it is part of our inheritance. And humanity’s.)

      Europe has also to realize that the PRC, Putin, and the USA are not interested by Europe as a super power. Europe as a super dinner is more suitable to them. So Europe will be opposed. Meanwhile one can send the tanks to Luxembourg, just for occupation training, relaxation, and regurgitation of taxes unpaid.
      PA

  3. EugenR Says:

    I see the problem of Islam in wider range than just clash of civilizations between the Islam and Christianity or modern world. To my opinion the world is divided to advanced nations; US, Europe, Japan etc. Nations that want to become advanced; China, India, East Asia and South America, and the rest which either culturally oppose the modernity as solution to economic social problems or culturally are not capable to introduce the modern values necessary to implement modern politics, society and economics.
    What are the values necessary to achieve modernity? Acceptance of Multiculturalism. Openness to critical thinking. Belief in necessity to try to implement policy of equality for all the genders, races and different cultural identities. Education system that teaches cultural openness, values of cultural diversity, and critical thinking. Acceptance of family planning, as the only way how to secure for the future generation decent living conditions.
    All this practically doesn’t exists in the Muslim world. The result is discrimination based on gender, race, religion even tribal belonging that brings unresolvable continuous conflicts. Growing population that puts economic pressure on the stagnating backward economies. Frustrated young population, that is demographically the largest part of the population, that has no tools and no chance to establish decent life, so it can be easily militarized and recruited into any kind of violent acts.

    If my description of causes of the Muslim world crisis is right then the solution has to be different from the case that if we are speaking solely about clash of civilization, between liberal modern, searching peaceful coexistence and the other militaristic, despotic and inhuman system. To my opinion the solution can come only by social change in the Muslim world, which will include cultural change of mind. The human civilization has no chance of survival with other kind of civilization than the modern one. Re-adaptation of ancient cultural values is not an option for the world.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Islam is not a civilization. It is a superstition. AKA, religion.

      Similarly, there is no such a thing as “Christian civilization“. There is, at most, a superficially Christianized Western civilization. Religious law tried, but mostly miserably failed, to replace secular law in the West. I myself gave counterexamples. They were localized in time, space, impact.

      Christianism was mostly an unmitigated disaster.

      • itsnobody Says:

        Foolish (atheistic).

        You have the superstitious belief in “free-will” yet criticize other religions for being superstitious…LOL

        It shows you how delusional, stupid, and subhuman atheists are.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Multiculturalism, as I tried to explain in a preceding essay, is not about tolerating and respecting all cultural systems of thoughts and mood equally. It is first about getting to know them, and then criticizing them, so as one is able to pick up the best, reject the worst.
      Otherwise it’s just hypocrisy.

      Islam was ALWAYS a crisis. There was no golden age of Islam. It was caused by Jews, Christians and NON-OBSERVANT Muslims. I have explained this in detailed essays, long ago, all about demographics.

      Initially “Islam” was just a 40,000 men Arab army. The millions out there were not welcome to Islam. Other armies later adopted “Islam”.

      Iranians representing bare breasted women on painting 1,000 years made for a wonderful civilization, but it was NOT Islam. In name only.

      There is no civilization but civilization, reason is its prophet, and no superstition can compete.

      • EugenR Says:

        Whatever Islam was in the past, to me seems obvious that today at 21 century it totally failed morally. If even one (and they are much more than one) can justify act of murder because of a book writen, joke published, or any other reason that in name of islam are committed, then this culture-religion-ideology, call it whatever you want, is corrupt and has to be wiped out from the earth. How to do is a political problem. I believe free education and abolition of slavery of other gender is the most appropriate tool. If necessary this change has to be forced upon them.
        Ironically the Soviets thats what they tried to do in Afghanistan and failed due to religions fundamentalists and their supporters the US. Did you register that the Afgan opposition to Communistic regime started because the communists tried to educate girls and God forbid in two gender classes. Of cours at the time the Soviets were even more corrupt morally than the mujahidin.

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Now Europe has to send the army. It could start by allowing the French Republic to run a 10% budget deficit and re-arm massively.
          The mess we have now is a typical world war start. Hence the vote in Israel (I do not disagree with secretly, although I cordially detest Netanyahu, I must admit anti-ballistic systems is the way to go).

          The morality in Islam is abominable. It’s like with the Nazis, who were out to save all the beasts. What counts in a moral system is not its best, but its worst.

          Let me persist and sign:
          To judge a moral system, consider, and imagine, the worst. What counts in a moral system is not its best, but its worst.

          The Afghan war was started by Pakistani ISI and then Carter (1979), not the USSR. It’s all on my site… 😉

          The girl thing was invented by the ISI. My parents visited Afghanistan several times in the 1970s. French geologists’ discoveries got Washington all hot below the collar…
          PA

          • itsnobody Says:

            Man you’re really stupid and uneducated like most atheists are.

            Nazis like Tom Metzger, atheist, who is founder of the Neo-Nazi Group White Aryan Resistance?

            Or the Nazis in atheist countries like Sweden?

            Nazis sure hate Christianity…at least ALL (100%) of the Nazis I’ve spoken to.

            They always say things like:
            – “Christ-insanity is from the Joo’s texts”
            – “Christianity is a disgusting Semitic religion from the Joo’s texts”

            I view atheists as subhuman beings…it’s just like a dog, a cat, or some other domestic animal.

            Atheist countries like North Korea, Estonia, and Latvia already have near 0% Muslim populations…but they have the highest murder rates in Europe and Asia.

            You have to realize that there is no such thing as a non-racist White atheist and that every single White atheist is in on this White Nationalist/Nazi movement together.

            • Patrice Ayme Says:

              My family paid a very heavy prize, resisting the Nazis. You have to understand that, from my point of view, what you say are grave insults. If you were really a Christian, you would stop.

      • itsnobody Says:

        Man you’re really stupid and don’t understand history at all.

        It’s not your fault, you’re an atheist, which means you’re subhuman in terms of intelligence.

        My parents and sister are atheists they also hate Muslims so I know racist atheists are.

        If you were an unbiased you would see that Islam was actually better than many other religions in the world.

        For instance the pre-Islamic Arabian societies that you celebrate practiced female infanticide and treated women much worse…the Muslims abolished the practice of female infanticide, conditions improved for women.

        The majority of civilizations around the world viewed women as lower and treated women much worse than Muslims did.

        Many Native American and pre-Christian civilizations also practiced female infanticide, it still goes on commonly in India and China in modern times.

        The first female win a Fields Medal (which is equivalent to the Nobel Prize in mathematics) is from Iran, a Muslim, non-Western country, lol.

        THERE’S NEVER BEEN A WESTERN FEMALE WHO’S WON A FIELDS MEDAL, LOL!

        Isn’t there more than 500 million women in Western countries? So why hasn’t there been a female from a Western country that’s won a Fields Medal or Abel Prize?

        I guess the stereotype of women being bad at mathematics and only fit for nursing, biology, secretary work, etc…is still prevalent in the West!

        The idea of women’s rights in the West is just to be a porn star, dress provocatively, and get abortions lol…that’s what they criticize Muslims for not doing right?

        Women in the West can’t be more intelligent or successful or have higher incomes than males, they can just be more promiscuous, there can be more female porn stars, they can dress more provocatively, lol.

        I notice that you never criticize North Korea, an official atheist country that kills people for not accepting atheism as the truth.

        North Korea had gunned down and killed 80 people for possessing Bibles not too long ago.

        North Korea has a higher murder rate than almost every Muslim country.

        The reason why you hate Muslims is because you are biased…don’t you think it would be better to oppose both Muslim and non-Muslim violence and issues in the world?

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          I do not hate Muslims. I probably had/have more Muslim friends than of other sorts. Making remarks on some ideologies is not hating people some of whom may, or may not embrace said ideologies. Technically I am Catholic, but I have Christianophobia where I feel it is appropriate. Same for Islam.

        • pshakkottai Says:

          “The majority of civilizations around the world viewed women as lower and treated women much worse than Muslims did. majority of civilizations around the world viewed women as lower and treated women much worse than Muslims did.”

          I am not sure of Christianity and Judaism but I am sure of India. In India god can be imagined in any form a person likes. Neuter like the impersonal Brahman ( supposed to be directly experiencable by yoga and supposed to pervade the whole universe), or as pairs like Shiva – Parvati (for Death and Life, meaning that cell death is necessary for growth of an organism), Vishnu- Lakshmi ( for protection and prosperity), Brahma-Saraswati (for creator- knowledge) and any number of incarnations and forest spirits to mange the welfare of the forest and animals therein. Buddha is the tenth avatar of Vishnu.
          All idols are symbols and representations. In India there was no need to fight for any god. Similar to Greece and Rome and Europe before Christianity. There was no concept of original sin or a punishing god or concept of hell.Very civilized gods for a civilized civilization! In the old Upanishads, women discussed things like “what is life and what is the purpose of Life?” In the oldest goddess (7000 BP in the Neolithic period) we have BhuDevi the earth goddess =Cybele, her symbols still in use on wedding talismans.
          I am not white and I am an atheist. Hinduism accepts atheism
          Just like Buddhism, an offshoot of Hindu philosophy.

          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Indeed, Partha. Anyway, what does “atheist” mean?

            And what does “THEIST” mean? That one does not acknowledge a boSS, watching over? Hindus are hardly atheists, having a million “gods” or so.
            I think what Do theists want to say that they represent by proxy, the goodness, right of way, power of the alleged god they subscribe to? Is not theism a convenient lie?/strong>.

            • pshakkottai Says:

              Gods are basically role models for all people who would not be able to understand the fine points of philosophy. For example the eightfold way is simple enough to get by but Buddhist philosophy is esoteric. Similar to Vedanta and the four states of consciousness and yoga practice to “know thyself”. There are lots of stories about gods and lots of poetry. Children like them.

          • itsnobody Says:

            lol…what you’re talking about is just fantasy.

            In India women were treated much worse than in the Muslim world….this is clear from Indian scriptures and historical evidence.

            Women in India (and many civilizations around the world) weren’t really viewed as nearly equal to men and almost like animals…not allowed to read or write or do things males are allowed to do.

            The concept of hell exists in Indian scriptures, like the Buddhist pali canons and Puranas…some people even think the concept of hell originated in India.

            There were many wars in India, like with the Rajputs of India.

            Female infanticide is still common in modern day India, whereas the Islamic Arabs had abolished the practice of female infanticide since the Middle Ages!

            Hindu scriptures make it clear that a boy child is strongly preferred, this theme is prevalent in Hinduism.

            The United Nations has declared India the most dangerous country to be born a female with more than 50 million females missing!

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Iran is part of the West (Indo-European languages). Also, a point was made. The great mathematician Emmy Noether was also female, and there were other examples of towering female mathematicians, higher than the Fields, a prize for young mathematicians.

          • itsnobody Says:

            You’re a liar.

            There hasn’t been any Western female that’s won a Fields Medal or Abel Prize (the highest prizes in mathematics).

            Emmy Noether never won a prize nearly as high as the Fields Medal or Abel Prize.

    • pshakkottai Says:

      What are the values necessary to achieve modernity?
      Hi eugeneR:
      In my opinion, the most important is to obey the rights of man and removal of all statements that are criminal. For example, kill the kafirs must be a no-no.
      Partha

      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Indeed. This is it! The point that nearly nobody understands, apparently: religions that order to kill the innocent for no good reason, should be killed..

        • itsnobody Says:

          I disagree…I think both religious and non-religious violence should end.

          The Batman movie theater shooter was atheist-agnostic, he killed 12 people.

          North Korea kills innocent people for not accepting atheism as the truth, just like Stalin and other atheists did in the past in the name of atheism.

          Communist atheists believe that atheism should be accepted as the truth and those who oppose atheism by spreading religion should be killed.

          Estonia the most atheistic country in the world has one of the highest murder rates in Europe, but they have a near 0% Muslim population.

          I had a friend from Estonia, his parents were murdered there when he was 5-years-old by the KGB.

          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            It’s not because someone wearing black socks kills a dozen that black sock people kill dozens.

            “Communist atheists”???? Where are they located? Russia and Ukraine spent billions rebuilding destroyed cathedrals (and I approve that). The USSR killed millions, even tens of millions (said Stalin), however the main reason for killing them was never theism. And the proof is that Russia still has a large Christian population practicing the superstition. And others, such as Putin, extremely close to, and respectful of, the church.

            Estonia is not following the order of the KGB, quite the contrary, as it sees the KGB as an oppressor.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
            shows that, by far, the least superstitious country is France. 40% of the French do NOT believe there is a superior god, or life force. (29% only in Estonia.)

            None of these confusions which seem to affect you, excuses your principle that people who do not believe in YOUR god are “SUBHUMAN”.
            That may fit Christ’s verse of the sword (“drag unbelievers in front of me, and kill unbelievers”), but it’s ultimate violence: killing for no good reason.

            The Franks, 13 centuries ago, viewed Islamists (“Sons of Sarah”) as a type of Christians. And the verse of the sword is in the Qur’an, indeed.
            PA

      • EugenR Says:

        I agree 100% with your statement. Yet there is still a question, what to do with people belonging and identifying themselves with ideologies of totalitarian non tolerance towards others and other opinions and believes? Do we have to tolerate them? Do we have to be tolerant towards their ideology and believes? Maye the only way to diminish them is to declare Jihad of our own on them under the flag of humanitarian liberal values we believe in? Yes i agree with Patrice, sometimes you have to kill to prevent bigger evil.
        Would you kill Hitler if you could and would know what it means to let him continue to live?
        There is a threshold between decency and criminality every criminal has to cross. There is an other threshold every murderer has to cross to become a murderer. To many of the Muslim youth are crossing this threshold, and there is no social, political or economic excuse for this. There are many societies who are much worse in these aspects than the Muslims and still they are not murderous as a group. It has to be connected to their basic concept of philosophy of life that brings them to these acts. And i can’t help it has to do with their cultural believes. Culture that creates out of it believe system, groups of people, that are ready to make all these horrendous acts to other people, we see on the web, without any obvious reason, have to be i-legitimized. Nazism had to be diminished as a culture and ideology to stop their acts. Even if many Nazis continued to live and thrive on personal level, the legitimacy of their ideology ceased to exist. The same has to be done with Radical Islam. It has to be outlawed, discriminated, and fought with. All who preaches its ideology, create groups under its flags and symbols, teaches its beliefs have to be eliminated, arrested made illegitimate.

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Dear Eugen: I am going to answer this interesting perspective, in an essay, I think. BTW, did you see my essay on Judaism/Nazism yesterday?

          • EugenR Says:

            I have seen, you brought up lots of interesting information.
            Here is my comment. I will publish it twice.

            Definitely i do agree that Nazism was not an issue of the mobs but rather the German elits, at least parts of it. My question is what brought all these people to their murderous tendencies? I believe very much in the theory of threshold crossing. Whenever you cross it, there is no way back. When Hitler started to murder ilegally innocent people, he had done it with collaborators, who crossed themselves thresholds. For them then there was no way back. So this shoud be how he enlarged the circle of co-murderers who had become part of the criminal guilt. There is no way out from such a community, just like in mafia. The same was truth for Stazi and some other this kind of organizations. So why they murdered ausgerechnet the Jews? This is always the question we Jews ask. Why us? I never found a satisfactory answer to this.

  4. Plutocratic Universities Are Not Universal | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/perspective-islamophobia-is-not-racist/ […]

  5. itsnobody Says:

    Sure do sound like a racist…the majority of people who hate Islam are also racists against non-Muslims aren’t they?

    If you fools (atheists) are really telling the truth then would you have an issue with a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population?

    100% of all modern day atheist countries are extremely racist/White Nationalist…that’s really what atheism is about – White Nationalism.

    Just look at how extraordinarily racist and nationalist modern day atheist countries like New Zealand, Latvia, Denmark, and Sweden are…they are disgusting people, the lowest of the low.

    People have to realize that’s what an atheist/agnostic/non-religious population directly causes a racist White Nationalist society.

    Atheists are among the most disgusting and intolerant of all subhuman beings.

    They deserve to be hated and viewed as subhuman beings.

    White Nationalist hate Christianity and liberal atheists agree.
    White Nationalists oppose Israel and liberal atheists agree.
    White Nationalists support socialism and liberal atheists agree.

    White Nationalism and liberal atheism fit in together perfectly.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      I am not a racist, very far from it. My family is not “white”. I view your ways of insulting entire countries as strident racism. I disagree with Putin, but I do not insult Russia. I disagree with (some interpretations of ) Islam, but I do not insult all Muslims. You claim to be a Christian, u stop your insults.

      • itsnobody Says:

        The fools (atheists) claim to be merely Islamophobic as opposed to racist or White Nationalist.

        We can empirically test this hypothesis by encouraging the fools (atheists) to gain a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population in their countries.

        If they are telling the truth they should have no issue with a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population in their countries.

        If they are lying (like I absolutely KNOW that they are) then they would have a big issue with it.

        I hope one foolish (atheistic) empirically tests out this hypothesis.

    • pshakkottai Says:

      “the majority of people who hate Islam are also racists against non-Muslims aren’t they?”
      No.
      USA does not hate India. It is only Islam that does not owe allegiance to the place they are in. I don’t need to cite examples. All trouble in Europe is due to Muslims who demand special privileges for Islam and take offense to their religion and generally make a nuisance of themselves like praying on the road and stop traffic etc.Denmark and Sweden have the worst of this. They are hell bent on spreading barbarism, misogyny, Jewish hatred etc.

      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Indeed, Partha, indeed. I am in an excellent position to judge, because I was mostly raised in Muslim countries where, and while, the Saudi interpretation (Wahhabism, literal, from-the-Qur’an as its words appear) was not reigning.

        My own mother, alone, got rather more than less lost in the desert, in an area where the French army is presently fighting Jihadists. She was rescued by a solitary Touareg who gave her water. Smack dab in the very center of the Sahara desert (when one looks at a map of the whole Sahara). At the time, that was expected. Now what is the expected is massacres, violation, destruction, etc.

        Conclusion: when the French empire ruled, so did peace. Now something still rules, war. War rules.

      • itsnobody Says:

        Don’t be foolish (atheistic).

        The European countries with the highest percentage of Muslims have the lowest murder rates in the ENTIRE WORLD.

        The European countries the lowest percentage of Muslims, least non-white immigration and purest European stock have the highest murder rates in Europe (Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia).

        Sweden for instance has a murder rate of 0.7 per 100,000.
        The US has a murder rate of 4.7 per 100,000.
        The US state with the lowest murder rate has a murder rate 1.1 per 100,000.

        So Sweden’s (as well as most other European countries with high percentage of Muslims) have murder rates lower than all 50 US states!

        It’s amazing a country could have a murder rate that low.

        I know these people, their type, and their kind, they can careless about if the immigrant is Muslim or non-Muslim, that’s why I’m encouraging them to gain a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population.

    • pshakkottai Says:

      People have to realize that’s what an atheist/agnostic/non-religious population directly causes a racist White Nationalist society.”

      You realize this is insulting China and Japan which are Buddhist and therefore atheist.

      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Good point, Partha! South and East Asia has more than 3.5 billion non-theists. Hence, Itsnobody, is not afraid to insult nearly everybody. Is this why itsnobody wants to be really nobody at all?

      • itsnobody Says:

        China is not Buddhist dumbass.

        Of course I’m insulting China and Japan, they are disgusting people and very racist just every other atheist/racist in ALL of the entire world.

        100% of all atheist countries are extremely racist, they are the worst of all subhuman beings.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      There are more than 100 different, sometimes immensely different, versions of Islam. Right now it is mostly Muslims of different versions who are killing each other.
      Hating particular versions of Islam, an ideology, and superstition, is not hating Muslims, the individuals (more than once in my life, my closest friends were Muslims, and it is the case now).

      • itsnobody Says:

        lol…so where are they killing each other and what about non-Muslims who kill each other?

        The European countries with the highest percentage of Muslims have the very very VERY lowest murder rates in the entire world…so extraordinarily low that their murder rates are lower than all 50 US states (each and every US state).

        You’re really stupid and gullible, a real fool (atheist).

  6. itsnobody Says:

    I saw this “Atheist Group” at the University I use to attend, everyone there was White, the place was like a White Supremacy Organization.

    I had never really seen that many White people in one group before.

    Instead of calling it a “White Supremacy Organization” you can just call it “Atheist Group” instead.

    100% of all modern day atheist countries are racist or nationalist. In Sweden they always say things like “nationalism isn’t racism”…they are really terrible people.

    Sweden is so racist that they Eastern Europeans are African.

    This Swede said something like this to me “I’m not a racist, I have a friend from Croatia”…but he was really serious.

    Liberia, Siberia, Nigeria, Serbia, etc…it’s all the same to them.

    The fools (atheists) claim to be merely Islamophobic as opposed to racist or White Nationalist.

    We can empirically test this hypothesis by encouraging the fools to gain a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population in their countries.

    If they are telling the truth they should have no issue with a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population in their countries.

    But if they are lying (like I absolutely KNOW that they are) then they would have a big issue with it.

    How can Westerners be talking about women’s rights and things like that when the first female to win a Fields Medal (universally recognized as the highest prize in mathematics next to the Abel Prize) is from Iran, a non-western, Muslim country?

    Obviously since there’s more than half a billion (500 million) women in Western countries and most Western countries are more developed than non-Western countries we would predict the first female to win a Fields Medal to be from a Western country, lol, how embarrassing to Westerners.

    No Western female has won a mathematics prize even close to the Abel Prize or Fields Medal, lol.

    So what are Western women ahead in? They’re ahead in the number of female porn stars, the number of females who dress provocatively, the number of females who get abortions, the number of females that are promiscuous, lol.

    Women in the West can stay down in the shadow of a man, they can’t be more intelligent, or more successful, or have higher incomes than males.

    Since my parents and sister are atheists, of course they are racist, they also hate Muslims as well.

    Initially since I was indoctrinated into hatred by atheists I too was against Islam just like what the media portrays.

    But then when I broke away from my agnosticism, started studying different world religions and developing my own thoughts and philosophy, my views changed.

    The more I attempted to learn the truth, less biased and more objective I became.

    I see many negative and positive things about all types of religions, including in Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, etc…

    I see many positive things in Muhammad’s sayings like:
    – “Do you love your Creator? Love your fellow-beings first”
    – “They will enter the Garden of Bliss who have a true, pure, and merciful heart”
    – “Who is the most favored of God? He from whom the greatest good cometh to His creatures”
    – “Adhere to truth, for truth leads to good deeds and good deeds leads him who does them to Paradise”
    – “Ye will not enter Paradise until ye have faith, and ye will not have faith until ye love one another”
    – “Women are the twin halves of men”
    – “God enjoins you to treat women well, for they are your mothers, daughters, aunts”
    – “Whoever doeth good to women, it will be a curtain to him from hell-fire”
    – “He who leaveth home in search of knowledge, walketh in the path of God”

    So in exploring different religions I didn’t think Islam was as bad as media portrayed it as and thought that other non-Muslim issues were more valid concerns.

    I had experienced all types of things and learned so many amazing wonderful things.

    Right now on Earth I believe that I’m one of the highest souls, there aren’t any other human beings that I know of like me, but I’m keeping everything a secret until the time is right.

    I believe in the future I will become a fully perfected soul, a pure vessel of light, since there is no free-will, it’s inevitable.

    I do not know if Muslims are right or not, but I absolutely know with 100% certainty that atheists are wrong, so I fight them off with the sharp sword of the truth emanating from my words.

    Of course since I was chosen no fool (atheist) with their subhuman inferior mind can stop me!

    To me, an atheist is a subhuman being, even lower than dogs, cats, and other domestic animals….once they rise up in the future I can finally reveal my plan…that will most likely be the time when I’m finally ready…

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Sweden is accepting an absolutely gigantic contingent of Muslim refugees (something around 50,000 last year). Italy, Sweden, France, Germany, and another country I forgot, absorb 80% of the massive refugee influx inside Europe. Just those 5 countries.

      Sweden has 4.6% Muslim, augmenting quickly (France is at 7.5%, although much more French have part Muslim ancestry).
      http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/15/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/

      That an ideology with mass appeal has appealing statements is obvious. So there is a lot of good in any mass ideology, even that of the Aztecs.

      In religion, the problem is not the good, but the bad. A serpent can be magnificent, and cool, still if its venom kills, one should not caress it.

      Good luck being god. You will need it.

  7. Laurent Coq Says:

    An interesting but scary fact is that majority of people do not have the smallest notion about how much brained washed muslims are, and this since their very first age………………….

  8. Patrice Ayme Says:

    Guardian interview with Houellebecq
    http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/06/michel-houellebecq-submission-am-i-islamophobic-probably-yes

    I ask him if, as he has been accused, he hates Islam. “I think about it very little,” he says. “Well, I suppose I thought about it a little more this time …” he adds, trailing off.

    After he was acquitted in court for saying Islam was “the stupidest religion”, has he changed his mind? “I don’t know if I’ve really changed my mind,” he says. “It’s true that reading the Qur’an is rather reassuring. So I said [when Submission came out in France] that I was reassured after having read the Qur’an. That said, maybe I hadn’t thought it through enough before saying that, because objectively, there’s just as little chance of Muslims reading the Qur’an as Christians reading the Bible. So what really counts in both cases is who is the clergy, or middleman, or interpreter. And in the case of Islam, that’s very open.”

    Is he Islamophobic? “Yes, probably. One can be afraid,” he replies. I ask him again: you’re probably Islamophobic? “Probably, yes, but the word phobia means fear rather than hatred,” he says. What is he afraid of? “That it all goes wrong in the west; you could say that it’s already going wrong.” Does he mean terrorism? He nods. Some might say that’s a tiny percentage of people, I begin … “Yes, but maybe very few people can have a strong effect. It’s often the most resolute minorities that make history.”

    He has argued in interviews that Islamophobia, or fear of Islam, is definitely not a kind of racism and that the judges’ decision to acquit him in 2002 proved that.

    [En 2002, Houellebecq a été accusé par des associations d’inciter à la haine raciale après avoir déclaré: «La religion la plus con, c’est quand même l’islam. Quand on lit le Coran, on est effondré… effondré!».]

    Houellebecq’s main target in Submission is what he believes is France’s limp and cowardly intellectual and political class. In Paris, the most visible change when he returned from self-exile three years ago was the number of homeless “that had really exploded in the 10 years I’d been away”, but in the nation as a whole he noticed the media obsession with Islam (“it really wasn’t talked about before I left”) and, most importantly, he says: “the people’s great contempt for its elite: politicians, bosses, journalists … it was really very big.”

  9. Patrice Ayme Says:

    Houellebecq in Figaro Magazine, June 1, 2015:

    ● Sur les musulmans français:

    «Sur les sujets sociétaux, (les musulmans français) sont aux antipodes des socialistes, et plus encore des écologistes. Il suffit de prendre la question, devenue emblématique, du mariage homosexuel, pour s’en convaincre. (…) On voit bien ce qu’est une prise de position catholique sur les sujets sociétaux type euthanasie ou mariage homosexuel: ce sont des positions de droite, comme celles des musulmans. Sur d’autres sujets comme l’immigration, ou les tentatives récurrentes de supprimer le RMI ou le RSA, les catholiques sont plutôt de gauche. J’ai l’intuition qu’un parti catholique et un parti musulman, s’il en existait un en France, seraient souvent d’accord. Parce que la religion vient d’ailleurs, elle est autre que la politique.»

    ● Sur l’expansion mondiale de l’islam:

    «L’islam est dans une phase ascendante. Mais est-ce anormal? Quand on pense détenir la vérité, on souhaite en faire profiter tout le monde. Une religion qui ne cherche pas à conquérir de nouveaux adeptes est une religion d’un autre type, plus ancien, une croyance tribale. Une religion universaliste est tout naturellement expansionniste.»

    ● Sur le catholicisme et le retour du religieux:

    «Il n’y a pas que l’islam qui se porte bien. Le catholicisme ne va pas si mal. Le mouvement de la Manif pour tous était très impressionnant, et authentiquement générationnel. Il y avait d’ailleurs beaucoup de musulmans dans la Manif pour tous mais les médias n’en ont guère parlé, parce que cela les embêtait de les avoir comme ennemis – alors que les catholiques faisaient des ennemis idéaux. Le retour du fait religieux est un mouvement mondial, une lame de fond. (…) L’athéisme est trop triste. Le besoin de sens revient. (…) Je pense que nous assistons en ce moment à la fin d’un mouvement historique qui a débuté il y a très longtemps, à la fin du Moyen Age. (…) La seule théorie authentiquement perdante en ce moment, c’est l’idéologie débutée avec le protestantisme, atteignant son apogée au siècle des Lumières et aboutissant à la Révolution, fondée sur l’autonomie de l’homme et le pouvoir de sa raison. Ça, c’est une idéologie qui est très mal partie ; je ne lui ai d’ailleurs même pas donné la parole dans mon roman.»

    Sur le Suicide français:

    «Je ne vois pas du tout les choses comme ça. J’ai l’impression au contraire qu’au milieu d’un continent qui se suicide, la France est l’un des seuls pays à se battre désespérément pour survivre. (…) Il y a un suicide plus général qui est celui de l’Occident, suicide économique, démographique et surtout spirituel, et si ce discours parle à mon narrateur, c’est parce qu’il évoque la réelle impossibilité de vivre sans Dieu.»

    ● Sur le «politiquement correct»:

    «Nous sommes arrivés en France à un point où le fait même de prononcer le mot islam peut vous être reproché; l’islam ne fait pas partie des sujets dont on puisse réellement débattre. C’est un peu effarant, d’ailleurs, d’observer que des centaines d’heures de débat se dévident sans que rien ne soit réellement dit, et avec des positions qui se durcissent.»

    ● Sur l’exil fiscal des Français:

    «Je les comprends. Ils ont raison. On paie trop d’impôts en France. Symboliquement, le bouclier fiscal à 50 %, c’était une bonne idée. On aime la collectivité, d’accord, mais pas à plus de 50 %.

  10. Islam: Basic Most Important Features | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/perspective-islamophobia-is-not-racist/ […]

  11. picard578 Says:

    “That certainly was not exactly the full intent of Muhammad”

    Actually, it was. Muhammad, from what I have found, had a rather interesting collection of mental illnesses – epilepsy, delusions of grandeur etc. His religion of Islam was originally designed for the conquest of Mecca, after he fled to Medina – hence why later Qur’an verses are more violent, and hence the principle that later verses override earlier ones.

    “At least in the Middle Earth”

    Neither in Asia. Muslims in India were in the business of killing Hindus ever since Islam first appeared there, for example.

  12. Trump: Deradicalize Islam. Good. | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/perspective-islamophobia-is-not-racist/ […]

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: