Why is the left so sympathetic to Islam?

[Someone here]

10 minutes ago, Roy said:

Don't expect people to be logically consistent, you'll be disappointed. The majority of people are fundamentally irrational and hypocritical. They are just behaving and thinking in whatever way is convenient to the ego. Their priority is their own biases first and foremost.

Around orange and the materialist level you'll find those most guilty of this "Gotchya!" mentality, and while it may be a useful tool to expose outright blatant stupidity, it's returns start to diminish when you use it for every little minor offense you find. Feminists may be inconsistent and do or say some stupid things, but it's mostly just collateral. They are actively trying to improve the world and fight injustice/corruption, way more than you can say for most people.

If you ask a Muslim in the west about how people aren't allowed to criticise them I wouldn't blame them if they laughed in your face.

Almost all we hear about Muslims is critical, scary, othering. From misogyny to terrorism. Just look at the news,. Think of the last 10 times you heard or read the word 'Muslim', I'll bet nearly all were in negative contexts.

Some of the criticisms are true about some Muslims, and there's usually the standard disclaimer it's only some Muslims, but the problem is that's almost all we hear about them. And this has consequences. Not only hate crimes and discrimination, but when you're a member of a community which feels stigmatised and looked upon as a threat, it can push some people towards alienation and resentment. Fuel the attitudes people accuse them of.

This is why thoughtful people try to counter the tide of negative portrayals of Muslims, to bring balance and sensitivity to an issue which requires it.

Then these people are categorised as hypocrites and 'regressive' for not talking about Muslims like some stereotype Other. The OP pretty much parroted the usual memes, summing up the exactly wrong way to have a thoughtful discussion about this.

[Someone here]

9 minutes ago, Loba said:

I don't know...?  I'm more left-leaning, and I support both Christianity and Islam - I think religion has a lot to offer - I have had awakenings and can see what all religions point towards and have a soft spot for all religions.

So, no religion is not to blame. Human stupidity and greed is generally to blame for humanities evils. Not any god or devil, just plain old people thinking they know better than others and rallying people (wittingly or not) to their own personal "crusade" against X, Y and/or Z ??

[Preety_India]

4 minutes ago, Someone here said:

So, no religion is not to blame. Human stupidity and greed is generally to blame for humanities evils. Not any god or devil, just plain old people thinking they know better than others and rallying people (wittingly or not) to their own personal "crusade" against X, Y and/or Z ??

It feels like you started a thread and took a straight U turn. 

The thread kinda lost steam pretty quickly. 

Edited February 25, 2022 by Preety_India

[Someone here]

@Preety_India lol that was a question not a statement 

[Loba]

@Someone here Yeah, that sounds pretty accurate to me tbh.
I don't blame religion, because it is doing its best from the time period it was made to explain Truth - which, if people were able to understand it easily enough, there would be a lot more enlightened people out there.  I have been meaning to buy the Quran in English, and got through some of the Bible and the Bible actually helped me when I was going through psychosis, I would open up a new page each day to read and it made so much sense.  It is literally a book to ground lost souls in, if used properly.

The way I took it is that the imagination creates what is all around us, and people can become unhinged and these books offer a grounding reality that all can agree on to grow from.  Humans need stories, our cultures are built off of them.

I realized as I was reading the Bible that I was bringing the Word into existence, and so I stopped reading because I was not ready to bring something like that into being.  It is happening Now - what these books point towards, and always was happening Now - for whoever reads them and Knows they are bringing the Word into Being, and when you Know this - you tend to take the Word in these books more seriously.

It is an individual process, for people to discover these books.

[Dryas]

13 minutes ago, Someone here said:

The real conclusion is Islam is partly very evil which is evident by the evil laden verses in the Quran that inspire some Muslims to commit terrible evils and violence which is empirically evident.

Why do they inspire some and not others? The interpretation matters. There exists progressive interpretations.

[Someone here]

3 minutes ago, Loba said:

@Someone here Yeah, that sounds pretty accurate to me tbh.
I don't blame religion, because it is doing its best from the time period it was made to explain Truth - which, if people were able to understand it easily enough, there would be a lot more enlightened people out there.  I have been meaning to buy the Quran in English, and got through some of the Bible and the Bible actually helped me when I was going through psychosis, I would open up a new page each day to read and it made so much sense.  It is literally a book to ground lost souls in, if used properly.

The way I took it is that the imagination creates what is all around us, and people can become unhinged and these books offer a grounding reality that all can agree on to grow from.  Humans need stories, our cultures are built off of them.

I realized as I was reading the Bible that I was bringing the Word into existence, and so I stopped reading because I was not ready to bring something like that into being.  It is happening Now - what these books point towards, and always was happening Now - for whoever reads them and Knows they are bringing the Word into Being, and when you Know this - you tend to take the Word in these books more seriously.

It is an individual process, for people to discover these books.

Not all Christians are evil either, nor Buddhists. Most certainly some are, and some will murder just as some Muslims. I do understand what you are saying in regard to "religion" as a whole. My qualm is purposefully attacking Islam. If the oil was in India no doubt we'd be talking about Hindu and Buddhist suicide bombers. If the religious roles were reversed and the west was not in power then the Christians would be suicide bombing. The problem is not the specific religion, the problem, as I see it, is that nations which are down-trodden turn to any peace of hope they can find. Some people prey on this and recruit fundamentalists (the specific religion doesn't really matter - note; not even Buddhism escapes this phenomenon). If there was no religion then there would be some other ideology to put to work, maybe nationalistic tendencies, basically some cultural difference, be it language, race or whatever.

If we are asking what religions are more prone to being manipulated into hatred, then yes, Islam is probably quite high up there, but I wouldn't put it higher than Judaism or Christianity. They are, as I've said already, pretty much cast from the same mold.

[Happy Lizard]

10 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

It feels like you started a thread and took a straight U turn. 

The thread kinda lost steam pretty quickly. 

you took a U turn on our conversation just as well, I can't pin point/define your position neither would you.

[Someone here]

6 minutes ago, Dryas said:

Why do they inspire some and not others? The interpretation matters. There exists progressive interpretations.

I can agree that religious institutions have an agenda. People who believe in whatever they believe do so for many different reasons. If you are repressed you use it as a force to oppose repression, if you are scared of death you use it as a comfort, if you have many questions that cannot be answered or tackled you rely in the "faith" of assuming there is a higher order and purpose. These people are quite obviously vulnerable to manipulation and religious institutions have taken advantage of this numerous times in human history.

There is no conclusive proof in a matter like this. To think so is to fall into a dogmatic belief. What we can do is a have a considered and balanced discussion about what feeds evil institutions.

Edited February 25, 2022 by Someone here

[SgtPepper]

I think people in the West are more critical of Christianity because they grow up in it and so they feel more righteous being able to do so since it's their culture. They also feel the direct effects of extreme christians. 

Most westerns I know, don't really know the specifics Islam. All extremists in Islam are simply as seen as extremists, not the majority of muslims. They are assessing Islam differently because they have no experience of it and don't know anything about it.

 

 

[Someone here]

5 minutes ago, SgtPepper said:

I think people in the West are more critical of Christianity because they grow up in it and so they feel more righteous being able to do so since it's their culture. They also feel the direct effects of extreme christians. 

Most westerns I know, don't really know the specifics Islam. All extremists in Islam are simply as seen as extremists, not the majority of muslims. They are assessing Islam differently because they have no experience of it and don't know anything about it.

 

 

Clear, but still not answering the question posed (Which was my point.)

I asked why do people defend Islam. My general answer was that people tend to defend attacks on groups of people. Like I said above, we don't all think Muslims condone beheading any more than we think all Christians think homosexuality is a sin.

Given that most of us don't really understand the religion of Islam we find it very hard to say anything about it because we (in the west) have a Christian tradition that runs right through our society (and I doubt many of us even speak Arabic either!) It does not matter whether we believe this or that, it is still a prominent factor in western society. We don't really need to be educated about Christian traditions and culture because in the western world we've been brought up in the heart of it.

Then we have minorities in our nations (Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, or whatever) and we, being rational people, understand that what other people do on the other side of the world does not represent what our neighbours do and think. Some people forget this and become consumed by hatred. It is quite normal to be consumed by hatred via associating. If a man with one arm murders your family in front of you, you'll likely carry around a psychological profile of all one-armed men in a very negative light even if you understand the irrationality of such a prejudice. This is why I see people being very quick to try and make people see past blind hatred and embrace reason.

I don't see it simply as a case of sticking up for what you think is right (not quite sure why you'd stick up for something you thought for wrong so imagine you erred in your writing?

Many scholars have gone over the Quran and generally I have heard that the interpretation is a big deal. I am not sure why it is more significant than with the Bible (cannot remember the argument now), but that was a repeated theme I remember reading about.

[Someone here]

If those who commit evils and violence zealously with the intent they are doing 'good acts' [ihsan] their divine duty for Allah in accordance to what is in the Quran, WHO ARE YOU, me or any one to judge they are wrong??

The critical point here is only Allah can have the final say. Problem is Allah will not communicate to humans directly and will not appear on Earth to make a judgment on whether who is right or wrong. Allah will only make a judgement on Judgment Day. In reality Allah [God] do not exists at all.

So, as long as the evil elements in the Quran exists as divine words and commands, SOME [not all] Muslims who are evil prone will be inspired by those evil elements. To them, they are influenced and compelled to do what is expected of them as per the Quran and unfortunately there are evil elements in the Quran to lead these people to commit evils [they deemed in as good].

In general, those who strive [jihad] for the cause of Allah [sabil] in fighting and killing non-Muslims under conditions of zulimu, fasad, etc. are given greater rewards than other Muslims. Allah had condemned the coward Muslims for staying at home and not migrating to fight when Muslims abroad are oppressed and taken advantage of.

[Loba]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

Not all Christians are evil either, nor Buddhists. Most certainly some are, and some will murder just as some Muslims. I do understand what you are saying in regard to "religion" as a whole. My qualm is purposefully attacking Islam. If the oil was in India no doubt we'd be talking about Hindu and Buddhist suicide bombers. If the religious roles were reversed and the west was not in power then the Christians would be suicide bombing. The problem is not the specific religion, the problem, as I see it, is that nations which are down-trodden turn to any peace of hope they can find. Some people prey on this and recruit fundamentalists (the specific religion doesn't really matter - note; not even Buddhism escapes this phenomenon). If there was no religion then there would be some other ideology to put to work, maybe nationalistic tendencies, basically some cultural difference, be it language, race or whatever.

If we are asking what religions are more prone to being manipulated into hatred, then yes, Islam is probably quite high up there, but I wouldn't put it higher than Judaism or Christianity. They are, as I've said already, pretty much cast from the same mold.

I agree.  I feel it isn't so much the religion or culture itself, but how the individual interprets it.  And some people use it to cause harm.
I heard a story once of a Muslim farmer who took in a wounded American soldier because the Quran said something along the lines of treating all men as your brother - something similar to that.  He chose to view the religion in his own way and focused on the positives and they stayed friends even after the soldier was deployed, the guy saved his life.

From what I understand, you have to read the books as though you are bringing them into awareness/existence itself.  As though the Word itself is what makes it so.  And that is what gives them power; is the correct interpretation.  Because I have some mystical experiences to fall back on, I can, just like the farmer - interpret, as far as I am able to, the Truth in these books and so I get a lot more out of them than someone who has never had an awakening before.

I feel as though the people who use it to cause harm, do it because they feel the world would be better if it had a completely unified world view.  And that's actually true, but I think that unified world view is actually going to be a hodge podge of the best things, the things we have created as a species that showcases Truth in all sorts of ways.  From ancient books, to artwork, writing, music, architecture, ect.

Why do you think Islam is more prone to hatred?  I have very little experience with the religion other than the people I have met and they have all been nice and peaceful.  Same with Christians.

[silene]

3 hours ago, Someone here said:

I know a little about Islam myself. I also know many Muslims see the "war" and interpret the words from Arabic as representing an inner struggle. Much like the Bible they take it metaphorically not literally (some get it wrong, much like those in the Bible belt who believe the world was created in seven days by some deity). 

 

3 hours ago, Someone here said:

Muslims insist their holy texts, i.e. the Quran of the present are exactly word for word what was originally revealed to Muhammad via Gabriel from Allah.
Christians believe the doctrines [not necessary word for word] are exactly what God had revealed to Jesus.
Non-believers will dispute the above points but it has no relevance to believer who will follow what God said in the holy texts literally.

The issue of metaphorical vs literal interpretation is an important one. Often the text itself doesn't guide you, although passages like Christian parables are clearly stories rather than facts. I chose these 2 quotes of yours to show how messy this interpretation can be. I understand that Muslims have a class of members called 'scholars' who are seen as authorities to help them decide. 

I wonder how much individual choice Muslims have in this, eg what would happen if someone decided one day that praying is only metaphorical so they don't need to do it literally? 

On the other hand, it must feel pretty insecure and defensive if you believe the whole scripture is literally, historically true. The slightest internal contradiction or conflict with science, and the whole world view would come crashing down. There's no room for compromise. There's a danger of believing yourself into a very dualistic bubble. 

[trenton]

@Someone here I can give a reason for being defensive toward all kinds of religions.  I see the double standard you are trying to point out in that the many failures of Islam is ignored.  The approach I would take is to emphasize the similarities between all religions.

This way I do not have to defend one and attack another.  The ideas in Islam I would point to is the greater vs lesser jihad, forgetfulness, no images as in other religions and so on.  If you can point to similarities in other religions, then this is a key to stopping persecution and hatred toward other religions.

One of the reasons the left may be critical of Christians is If Christians view Muslims as objectively evil and therefore reject any validity.  this would be a criticism from below.  This is the same underlying problem that lead to persecution on all sides throughout history.  The left is afraid that the evils of Islam can be used to justify more evils against them.  The cycle of hatred continues and the left wants to stop it rather than block refugees based on the fact that they are Muslims or start religious profiling of suspected terrorists.

I don't mean to make excuses for the corruption of all religions.  They still need to grow out of these old ways of thinking eventually because the anti-secularism cannot be sustained without further persecution.

[Someone here]

13 hours ago, Loba said:

I agree.  I feel it isn't so much the religion or culture itself, but how the individual interprets it.  And some people use it to cause harm.
I heard a story once of a Muslim farmer who took in a wounded American soldier because the Quran said something along the lines of treating all men as your brother - something similar to that.  He chose to view the religion in his own way and focused on the positives and they stayed friends even after the soldier was deployed, the guy saved his life.

From what I understand, you have to read the books as though you are bringing them into awareness/existence itself.  As though the Word itself is what makes it so.  And that is what gives them power; is the correct interpretation.  Because I have some mystical experiences to fall back on, I can, just like the farmer - interpret, as far as I am able to, the Truth in these books and so I get a lot more out of them than someone who has never had an awakening before.

I feel as though the people who use it to cause harm, do it because they feel the world would be better if it had a completely unified world view.  And that's actually true, but I think that unified world view is actually going to be a hodge podge of the best things, the things we have created as a species that showcases Truth in all sorts of ways.  From ancient books, to artwork, writing, music, architecture, ect.

Why do you think Islam is more prone to hatred?  I have very little experience with the religion other than the people I have met and they have all been nice and peaceful.  Same with Christians.

The Bible especially the Old testament more [quantity and quality] evil and violent elements than the Quran. But these evil elements are not presented in such a way that they will easily inspire Christians to commit evils and violence. In addition, the New testament has an overriding pacifist maxim, i.e. love your enemies, love your neighbor, give your other cheek, love this and love that etc. If a Christian were to kill his/her enemies, God will surely WTF him/her on Judgment Day for disobedience to the maxim he set.

Edited February 26, 2022 by Someone here

[Someone here]

12 hours ago, silene said:

 

The issue of metaphorical vs literal interpretation is an important one. Often the text itself doesn't guide you, although passages like Christian parables are clearly stories rather than facts. I chose these 2 quotes of yours to show how messy this interpretation can be. I understand that Muslims have a class of members called 'scholars' who are seen as authorities to help them decide. 

I wonder how much individual choice Muslims have in this, eg what would happen if someone decided one day that praying is only metaphorical so they don't need to do it literally? 

On the other hand, it must feel pretty insecure and defensive if you believe the whole scripture is literally, historically true. The slightest internal contradiction or conflict with science, and the whole world view would come crashing down. There's no room for compromise. There's a danger of believing yourself into a very dualistic bubble. 

In the case of the problem of evils from religions [notably Islam] and believers [especially Muslims] we need to break up the problem of religious related evils and violence into the following respective parts or elements.

1. Humans;
1a. DNA wise, all humans has the potential to commit evil and violence
1b. A percentile [conservatively 20%] of humans are born with an active evil propensity.
1c. 80% of humans do not have an active evil propensity less the dormant potential is triggered.

2. Religions as represented by their holy texts.
2a. The texts of some religions [e.g. Buddhism, Jainism] has negligible leading verses that are likely to inspire evil believers [1b] to commit evils.
2b. The texts of some religions [e.g Christianity, Gita] has some evil elements
2c. The texts of one religion [Judaism] has loads of evil elements that are likely to inspire evil believers [1b] to commit evils.
2d. The texts of one religion [Islam] has loads of evil elements that are likely to inspire evil believers [1b] to commit evils.

The quote [paraphrased] from Steven Weinberg is very relevant here;

"With or without religion you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things."
Religion Is An Insult To Human Dignity.
For good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”

Obviously the above implied religions with evil elements will inspire believers to commit evils.

To really understand the root causes of evils committed by believers we need to take into account all the variables in 1 and 2 above.

There are Buddhists who commit evils and violence. A serious analysis will reveal the root cause is 1b, i.e. there is a natural 20% of humans who will commit evil regardless. But as for Buddhism, these Buddhist are not inspired by an evil elements in their religious texts, i.e. see 2a. These Buddhists commit evil purely from their personal natural evil inclinations and that has nothing to do with Buddhism per-se.
If oil is discovered in India or Sri Lanka, there will never be wars, evils and violence triggered by Buddhism per se.

However for Islam the root causes of Islamic related evils and violence entail a different set of root causes.
As with any human beings, 20% of Muslims are born with a propensity for evil and violence of various degrees [1b].
The fact is there are loads of evil elements [2d] in the Quran which are catalysts in triggering the evil propensity in the evil prone Muslims [1b].
What is meant is, without the Quran, then there will be no Quranic-based evils and violence at all.
Obviously without the Quran, the natural evil prone will still commit secular evils and violence which must be addressed [in other OP] but that is not related to this OP.
So the religion of Islam do partially contribute the Islamic-based evils and violence.

So to find effective solutions we must address the relevant critical root causes.
In the case of Islamic or Quranic-based evils and violence we must address the evil laden verses in therein which inspire the evil prone Muslims to commit evils and violence.

The other main root cause, i.e. DNA based 20% has active evil potential must be addressed as well, but this inherent DNA-based problem is tougher to resolve than evil elements in a holy texts [Quran] from a God that do not even exists in the first place.

So the root causes of Islamic-based evils and violence is the combination of the following elements;

1a. DNA wise, all humans has the potential to commit evil and violence +
1b. A percentile [conservatively 20%] of humans are born with an active evil propensity. +
2d. The texts of one religion [Islam] has loads of evil elements that are likely to inspire evil believers [1b] to commit evils.

Your inability to identify 2d as a factor of evils and violence committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone [1b] is due to your shallow analytical skills and ignorance [btw not a defense] of the evil elements in the Quran.

The evil elements in the partial evil ideology of Islam [2d] must be singled out for resolution.
Those in the regressive left should not be ignorant of this fact [2d and 1b] and ignorantly sympathizing with this aspect of Islam in a stupid [intellectually not meant to be derogatory] manner.

[Someone here]

6 hours ago, trenton said:

@Someone here I can give a reason for being defensive toward all kinds of religions.  I see the double standard you are trying to point out in that the many failures of Islam is ignored.  The approach I would take is to emphasize the similarities between all religions.

This way I do not have to defend one and attack another.  The ideas in Islam I would point to is the greater vs lesser jihad, forgetfulness, no images as in other religions and so on.  If you can point to similarities in other religions, then this is a key to stopping persecution and hatred toward other religions.

One of the reasons the left may be critical of Christians is If Christians view Muslims as objectively evil and therefore reject any validity.  this would be a criticism from below.  This is the same underlying problem that lead to persecution on all sides throughout history.  The left is afraid that the evils of Islam can be used to justify more evils against them.  The cycle of hatred continues and the left wants to stop it rather than block refugees based on the fact that they are Muslims or start religious profiling of suspected terrorists.

I don't mean to make excuses for the corruption of all religions.  They still need to grow out of these old ways of thinking eventually because the anti-secularism cannot be sustained without further persecution.

The left are generally associated with social equality. I think that answer tells us all we need to know about why people on the left are wary of stereotyping a whole proportion of human society. The irony is that social equality is an ideal to work toward not an ideal that can realistically exist in todays world, and if we have equality then people are free to believe what they want to believe. Freedom is limited by society though. Whether we are talking about women's rights, racism or religion the leftist view is one that seems to want to give equal respect to everyone and equal freedom within society without being judged by anything but the current system of justice (by the law of the land).

My hardest question in politics is knowing how to reason with irrational ideals. I guess we all must suffer and remain resolute in our opinions of justice and slowly but surely popular opinions will eventually shift to where they will shift. Most people actively oppose violence and by doing so no doubt cause some too.

Maybe the "left" comes to the aid of Muslims because they need an injection of equality and justice in their ranks? That seems like a good thing to me. If those wishing for social equality became Muslims they would create a greater sense of equality in that religious group, or rather add weight to the elements within the Islamic community to tip the scales more in favour of basic human rights and equality for all (including homosexuals and women).

[Someone here]

there are many violent interpretations of the Quran. That is something we should be trying to quash about Islam and I believe the intent of those delineating between people murdering innocents and religious people who oppose such acts.

I guess am I really saying that if there was no Islam they'd still be some act of violence being committed on a similar, or more extensive, scale. We're simply stuck in our own time and own relative positions trying to figure out how to deal with the wrongs and rights of human nature.

[silene]

6 hours ago, Someone here said:

I guess am I really saying that if there was no Islam they'd still be some act of violence being committed on a similar, or more extensive, scale. We're simply stuck in our own time and own relative positions trying to figure out how to deal with the wrongs and rights of human nature.

 

Makes sense. I'd add that most religions are traditional, their teachings and practices are fossilised in time of the first few centuries after they started. Islam actually has a taboo on 'innovation' doesn't it? So as long as they're still functioning to progress the development of society, then great. But at some point they start to slow down progress: treatment of women is a good example. Islam provided an improvement when it first started, but it hasn't continued to progress, so that now, secular movements like feminism and socialism have taken over the baton of progress. Feminism will reach its apex too in time, and need to be surpassed if it doesn't evolve. Change is important and requires a willingness to let go of the past when it no longer serves us.