Why the fuck are so many leftists defending Islam lately?

no

they're ultra reactionary fucks

state atheism and violent repression of religion are necessary for socialism

t. CIA

sure they are, I never implied they won't have to be dealt with, however we could see the potential of spreading propaganda among the lines of white nationalists are againts islam, and are founded by jews

then let them fight each other to death

t. CIA

they hate the white identity they were born with and can't get rid of so they promote things that harm whites. I have a lot of swede friends (cucked and swedish dem) and that's pretty much the story I've heard told from what happened there

Stupid political correctness,thinking that anticlericalism is "racist" somehow

P.S.: "they" as in that one person who actually did it in the video

Privilege theory + "if the far-Right hates them, we must reflexively love them in return"

what about white muslims like chechens and bosnians? islam isn't inherently linked to race

How many of them know that Azerbaijan are a nation of muslim atheists?

I said white identity and not caucasians for a reason. Also chechens have a bunch of mongol blood in them

user…

It literally sounds like cultural feudalism.

This.

...

There was one on the Rubin report.

It's not weird for atheists in eastern europe to wear a cross and go to church with their family. The religion in their area is just part of their culture.

Wouldn't that make you love him? Genghis Khan killed a shitload of muslims and Made Mongolia Great Again

Defend the people, not their regressive ideas. Recognize that their just as much spooked as the West

The term you're looking for is ex Muslim

Are you being pedantic about me putting 'muslim' and 'atheist' together, or do you have trouble believing that a 94% muslim country has 74% of its people self-report as irreligious?

No, it's a real thing sadly:
youtube.com/watch?v=d0YvEDjRcU4

Wow i gate these cringey liberals tbh and Im muslim.

No. I will not do that.

Why is it OK to hate fascists for their ideas but not OK to hate Muslims for their ideas?

But the people were the ones that came up with those.

I don't think so, see here why:

Logically impossible. You cannot be a muslim and an atheist.

No, a bunch of dead people came up with the majority of them, and many of said ideas weren't actually regressive at the time they were developed.

Well, if you go to a christian country, you can probably get away with repressing Islam.

Then they will have no problem shedding those beliefs en masse.

Oh wait, those that do get killed. Better luck next spook. 8^)

How will you have a global revolution if different people are oppressed in different places.

Yes.
And people alive today maintain them. Also
Are you serious?

To this day, Mongolians have Genghis Khan on their currency. If nothing else, you have to admire their pride.

nytimes.com/2005/05/10/world/asia/mongolia-sees-genghis-khans-good-side.html

Biggest murderer in history, adjusted for population.

The way people practice religion is a reflection of themselves. People ignore the parts of religion they find inconvenient, and practice the parts that they find appealing.

That's how it always work, for all people, for all religions. The religions themselves have no "true" nature since they are tortured incoherent messes full of contradiction, vagueness, and nonsense. They only take on coherent character when interpreted by believers.

Yes, that's right. Mongolians revere him nevertheless. And despite this, most Mongolians are really nice people who would never dream of murdering you. Great BBQ too.

Define "white"

You mean culturally Muslim?

I can't defend people who subscribe to religious bullshit

I don't trust hardline theists one bit

explain to me why language refers to other words instead of perception and pick your nobel prize after you've done that

Those who receive "white muh privilege".

Lurk more.

It's quite simple really.

Islam will dominate the world.

Is that not a rhetorically useful definition of "white"?

We aren't SJW liberals. Take your haunted head to Tumblr.

Olive fever.

checked. Protestants are cucked by beweef.

If I thought you were, I wouldn't be here.

Try this definition on for size:
>Those whom SJW liberals would claim receive white muh privilege
Neither of us agree with those SJW liberals, but we both understand the group that is meant by that, right? There's no need for confusion over what is meant by "white", even if you object to such terminology.

Shitgenstein was worthless

Even if white muh privilege does exist, it doesn't mean whiteness does

So many Holla Forumsacks running into the filters and exposing themselves.

Religion isn't a problem, any organization of it is. Abolishing the state would abolish any power structures including the vatican, Middle-Eastern Theocracies, etc. People should be free to practice their religion, but the structures that uphold it are oppressive and poisonous.

If white muh privilege is believed to exist, then white necessarily has a pragmatic definition, if only as defined in the context of the beliefs of those who claim white muh privilege exists.

White muh privilege may not exist, but as long as there are people who believe it does there will be people who are believed to have it. The people who are believed to have it can be defined as "white". Perhaps "People who are believed by some to have white muh privilege" could also work, but is much clumsier, no?

Lack of organization doesn't make a religion necessarily harmless. Men oppressing their wives and daughters because they think that some god wants them to, even in absence of any organization, is a bad thing.

thats exactly what i was thinking.
if you ban mosques, churches, tramples … relligions would die off in matter of years.

They should start by banning murder first, there's too many people being killed.

Religion can and has been harmful without states in the past, they become more of a problem if they have enough political philosophy to run a state anyways like Islam etc.

Orientalism and virtue-signaling.

Oh, is that where Godfrey Elfwick is from?

I thought that was Timur Lang. Who, incidentally, also had statues built in his honor as soon as the USSR disbanded.
wew lad

A central figure in the Quran is a woman. Fundamentalists are the cause, just like how Christian fundamentalist oppress women.

No it won't, some people will always need that comfort. And places of worships aren't the same as power structures of worship.

Try harder.

Name one religion without a power structure behind it that was devastatingly harmful.

So what? Does that somehow un-oppress women when they get murdered for "honor"? The only true nature of a religion is how the adherents adhere to it. Organization is not required for a believer to oppress others.

It proves that the state is the culprit and not the text.

Your point? Remember that there is the principal of later passages "superceding" older ones in the Quran.

Not to mention the Hadiths.

The state is not required for a man to murder his daughter. The text is irrelevant, how believers behave is all that matters. The existence of a state is not a prerequisite for believers to oppress those who are close to them.

Fundamentalism wouldn't be a problem if the fundaments of the religion weren't shit.

If you're going to believe porky, just go whole hog and leave us alone.

This is literally what the left said during the iranian revolution

Woman are central figures in all sexist ideologies,they're pure, noble, loving, too good for this sinful earth so they better never set a step in it.

No matter the fundamentals of the religion, if the religion is sufficiently complex it can be interpreted/twisted to oppressive effect. Christianity and Islam are both sufficiently complex that you can make them justify anything. They've both historically been used to justify everything from charity to genocide.

If somebody is predisposed to abusing their daughters, they will read their religious text and find support of it, whether they are Christian or Muslim. That's why the text of their religion is irrelevant, and any argument about the true nature of the text is moot.

I haven't seen any leftists defend Islam (unless you count Gaddafi's crazy bullshit). The people in the video are liberals.

I have seen leftists defend Muslims though, that's because they're people

Because they are being scapegoted on the right. As I said on the chapo chat that got everyone pissed off, Islam at its core is an imperialist, reactionary, violent religion. The entire Religion of Peace shit is literally a play on a concept from Mohammad that when all non Muslims are killed or subjugated, global peace will be achived.

It should not be forgotten that the left is the first victim of Islamic violence. Hundreds of thousands if not Millions of leftists have died at the hands of Islamists.

Islam simply is not comparable to say christianity because the core messages are completely different. Jesus was not a Christian and he basically pushed for pacifist Socialism. Mohammad was a crazed genocidal warlord.

pretty sad I have to scroll all the way down to see this simple amount of nuance obviously

must be some Holla Forums infiltration with all the unironic "humans vs orcs" tier posting

Khadija is the most important feminine figure in the Quran who was married to Mohammed for 25 years until her death. Shia and Sunni consider her one of the most important.

The state creates the environment for traditions to be created like that. It is also cherry picking in the most rural and extreme areas of theocracies. It's like comparing every Christian to the Disciples of Christ..

Sick use of wordplay, nerd. It adds literally nothing to the conversation.

They could read anything then. They'd do it anyway. Some guy shot John Lennon because of Catcher in the Rye.

...

It's not a religion of peace. It's a religion. They don't have an alignment, this isn't like Orcus or Bahamut from Dungeons and Dragons. Point me to that passage.

Holla Forums I thought you didn't give a shit about sexist ideologies

If a person being a person is the best you can think of to defend them, that's damning with faint praise isn't it? Is it possible for a person to not be a person?

Every mass murdering tyrant that has ever lived has managed to be a person. Every serial killer, every rapist, every anime enthusiast to have ever lived was a person. To say that you defend somebody because they are a person is basically admitting that they have nothing else going for them.

Surely though you don't actually mean to be so cruel, that's just me twisting your words. You probably mean that you defend them because they're good people. You defend them because they've done nothing wrong, because they help others and value what you value. You help them because they improve your community and make great food. There are many reasons to defend Muslims.

lol you've been uncritically consuming some right wing bullshit to believe this, no muslims don't actually call their religion a "religion of peace". It's a religion of submission to something greater than themselves, which is neither here nor there on being objectively "good"

Hence why it needs to go.

So long as we have imaginary masters, humanity will never be free.

I'll defend irreligious people of all ethnicities and nationalities. But not the religious.

You're just too retarded to understand that if staying faithful to the teachings of a religion results in fucking ISIS, there must be something seriously wrong with the religion. It's nonsensical to say that fundamentalism is the only issue, and my 'wordplay' was just an attempt to point out this basic fact.

While true, you are ignoring that religion is placed especially beyond reproach. If I justify my oppressive practices with contemporary fiction, everybody will call me out on it. If I justify my oppressive practices by citing a religious text, a large portion of society will suddenly become much less inclined to speak out against me. If it were true that all textual justifications were treated equally, then religious texts would not be especially dangerous. But that's just not the world we live in.

yeah no thanks

Why do all you guys glorify gulags and fantasize about killing porky then get upset when muslims kill for their ideology or political causes?
Is it because you're really a bunch of gutless wimps who couldn't slaughter a chicken?
Tough shit, we're not going to appease you and we have no need to dilute our faith to appease you. The world does not revolve around you and your 2017 sensibilities.

All those "fundaments" come from Abrahamic text. It's shared across Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. You're being reactionary and it is embarrassing.

Maybe 200 years ago. Religious texts are treated like fiction nowadays and places where it is not is because of theocracy, back to my point of the text only having power because of the state. A secular collective, with individuals who practice their own religions would not take kindly to that interpretation. It only flies under a religious state

Kurds actually worship Hegel okay

t. Zahran Aloush

ISIS literally betrays some of the most basic teachings of Islam that even grade schoolers should know better. There are no interpretations of the Quran in which burning people alive is allowed, and they even make some incredibly basic theological mistakes in things that no average Muslim wouldn't roll their eyes at. You can even find online extensive refutation of their beliefs by serious, orthodox scholars (read: not even reformists offering up minority interpretations). Plus, as has been reported by numerous sources who have observed Islamic terror groups in the past as well as today, being extra religious is actually a detriment to being recruited since they primarily want gullible and frustrated young men, not scholars

I didn't speak for the leadership, on the ground it's still mostly Muslims. And it turns out it's not the religion they believe/grew up with that matters, it's that they're not sexually frustrated reactionaries

It's really not actually that hard to not become ISIS idk what the meme of how easy it is to turn the average MENA person into a terrorist is.

In practice the Saudis will always be considered a more authoritative source on the "true" nature of Islam than secular westerners. An unfortunate consequence of geography and history perhaps, but that is our reality nevertheless.

Even today a significant portion of westerns hold religious practices to a more permissive standard than secular practices.

...

T*rk detected.

It's just some shitty Holla Forums infiltrators, don't stress it

Fucking hell I bet you think these are intelligent points lmao

Zahran Alloush was a jihadist rebel leader, just meme'ing breh. All the Islamist groups in Syria call the YPG godless kufar commies.

Kurds are mostly Sunni Muslim but there's an increasing amount turning to Zoroastrianism again.

Saudi Arabia will always be a source on "true islam", but the porky house of Saud and their funding of fundamentalist schools aren't an inevitability. I promise the people will get on just fine with their heads on a pike

Permissive can be secular. Secular just means that the society isn't dictated by a religion. That doesn't mean people who practice are sent to the gulag. That is totalitarian idpol in action.

im not turd either, guess again :—–DDDD

DURR xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

got me tbh, gotta actually read better before responding

and yeah I know, islamists gonna islamist

who cares where you're from, autism knows no ethnicity

All adherents of large religions are inconsistent with other interpretations of their religion, because consistency in such a large complex system is impossible. They think they're right, you think you're right. Who's actually right?

Well since there is no cosmic judge, it hardly matters. What mattes is you both exist. Even if you think they're wrong, they still exist. Even if they think you're wrong, you still exist. Personally I think both are wrong, yet much to my chagrin both stubbornly insist on continuing to exist.

Is that you PissPigGrandad?

kufar is just the islamist version of cuck for our right wing retards anyway

You're missing the point, if the core of a religion is to organize and govern in a certain way some people will try and attempt to do so. Not all religions are based on the worship of a god/gods some for example Islam extend further and have thier own political philosophy which can at times be excellent when trying to construct a socialist society.

let me put it this way, if I led a christian group that said jesus was an expert breakdancer from china and that crucifixion was just a euphemism for dropping sick beats we wouldn't be an "alternative interpretation of christianity" we'd just be retarded

Damn that's so accurate

kufars gonna kufar (and kill innocent people because their abstract point of view differs from your own) – sincerely aryan 1488 from kuwait :DDD

i hope saddam rises and gasses every kurd on earth TBH

Apathetic atheists, who believe in secular government, will tend to be more permissive of the wacky shit other people do if it comes with a religious justification. Is that clear enough for you?

Wear a hat indoors because "My head is cold". There are many that will consider that rude. But wear a hat indoors because "My god says I should keep my head covered" and suddenly just about everybody on the planet will be understanding. Isn't a cold head a perfectly reasonable and logical reason to wear a hat? Far more so than any religious justification. Yet wearing a hat because your head is cold is considered ruder than wearing a hate because your god told you to.

Religion is seen as a socially acceptable exception to standard hat etiquette, yet a cold head is not. That's obviously a trivial example, ultimately hats don't really matter, but it is true to varying degrees across much more important and controversial issues. It becomes a particularly serious problem when the treatment of children is concerned.

ISLAMIC COMMUNISM IS ONLY WAY FOR COUNTRY, IT'S ONLY WAY FOR THE WORLD

REMOVE ISLAM

REMOVE YOU

In practice literally everyone who's not a secular westerner is going to be considered a more authoritative source on the "true" nature of islam. The solution is to support not shitty native groups.

I'm sorry, but this anecdote isn't good and I know you're alluding to turbans and Hijab and there are reasons beyond "because my religion told me so."

I wear hats inside anyway.

what's your point?

Stop following your shitty desert cult.

I think you'd be both. There is a great deal of very fundemental disagreement in Christianity already, yet we call them all Christians. They can't even agree on how many gods there are! Some Christians aren't Trinitarian, others are. Some Christians only pray to their single god, or to their triple god-head, but some even pray to deceased mortals whom they believe have special favor with their god, or god-head.

Hell, one wacky group of Christians even wrote an entirely new book for themselves to prove that Jesus was a 'murican. Mormons have seriously divergent beliefs from many other Christians. Does that mean we should say they aren't Christian? I've tried that. Spoilers: it isn't productive. They'll become upset with you because they believe with the strength of religious conviction that they are Christians. Telling them they aren't is pointless. You're welcome to try, but you won't accomplish anything at all.

What the fuck is even islamic comm-
THIS IS NOT COMMUNISM.

FUCK ISLAM.

REMOVE.

REMOVE.

Actually I was thinking of kippahs and funny pope hats. I'm under the impression that turbans and hijabs are cultural, not specifically Islamic. Am I wrong about that?

You don't think i's possible to deviate far enough from the basic ideas of an ideology to no longer reasonably be considered a member of that ideology? That's an extraordinary position to take and one that I suspect you don't hold in earnest

By all rights mormons really fucking shouldn't be called christian, but they still are, so as far as religion goes it absolutely seems to be the case

Although of course turbans are religious for Sikhs, aren't they? I can't say I was thinking about them, but of course it still applies. It is socially acceptable for them to wear their headgear in situations where secular headgear would be considered rude.

where the fuck are you even quoting from?

Dudes like this weren't about charity you sperg
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh_Bedreddin

The text promotes modesty for both men and women, but isn't specific how. There is religious implications, but it has become cultural since there are many styles and some Muslim countries use them fashionably. I.E. Iran

My point is that when a nonmormon christian tells you they aren't really christian, they have a point and I assert that very few people would just roll their eyes and say "what's the difference anyway?"

I think that as long as somebody asserts they are a member of a religion, and earnestly believes that with the strength of religious conviction, then it isn't productive to assert otherwise.

Seriously, try telling a Mormon they aren't a Christian. You'll accomplish nothing but making them upset.

Wut Muslims all the fucking time spout the religion of peace shit

Also

You are right in a way I guess since Islam is basically Fascism the religion.

That's how I understand it as well.

Nah most people probably would roll their eyes and say "what's the difference anyway" because they have no particular understanding of mormon doctrine and also most of the people saying mormons aren't christian also say catholics aren't christian and that's just silly.

Fuck their fanfiction, tho

There's a difference between telling a Mormon (which presumably holds no functional purpose except to piss off an otherwise harmless people) they're not Christian and identifying that they're pretty far removed from traditional Christian doctrine.

Similarly, there's a difference between "telling ISIS they're not Muslim" (and who actually believes that would be effective anyway?) and understanding that they're pretty far removed from any reasonable interpretations of the base philosophy.

hell yeah dude you tell em xD

if you say so, keep sperging I'm sure your way will work eventually

just don't complain when ineffectual screaming turns out not to be the way to solve the problems in the middle east and other muslim countries

Hey, I think it's wacky too. Reading rocks out of a hat? Give me a break. At least burning bushes are theatric!

They aren't though

lettertobaghdadi.com/

I'm sure your next point will be that you're a better muslim scholar than over 100 actual Muslim scholars, kek

They're kinda far but certainly no mormons

Most is far too much, personally, I haven't ran into anyone who thought both were not Christianity.

maybe so, but you can't ignore that they're citing and refuting with actual scripture and it's not like ISIS has a comparable "book of ISIS" to point to and say that they have a different revealed doctrine like Mormons do

Who isn't? Even the Catholics are. How many Catholics can even explain what the hell "begotten, not made" means? That was a big deal to the First Council of Nicaea, and many Christians say those exact words once a week, every week. Yet despite that, it is rare to find a Christian capable of holding an intelligent conversation on what those words actually mean. That's hardly surprising since the issue is obtuse and has little practical everyday application to any Christian, but they keep saying it every week….

Okay, so understanding of their religion is not exactly a matter of how traditional their doctrine is, but the Catholic masses even knowing how to read their holy book isn't exactly traditional is it? The Catholics have been changing what they believe and how they worship for about as long as they've been around.

Catholics cite scripture when refuting Protestants. Protestants cite the same scripture when refuting Catholics. Mormons cite scripture that neither Protestants nor Catholics even recognize.

In matters of theology, trying to determine who is actually right is a waste of your time and energy.

I'm sorry, the fact that some difference of interpretation can reasonably exist does not undermine the fact that some interpretations are going to be unreasonable.

Okay buddy.

They, with the strength of religious conviction, do not believe their interpretation to be unreasonable. They'll continue to believe it until you kill them for their belief.

Yeah my family is catholic and for whatever reason my mom was going over the exact combo of god and man in christ and WHOOP TURNS OUT SHE'S A HERETIC, THAT'S NON-CHALCEDONIAN

Okay basically all of them are going to agree with shariah law but they'll also basically all disagree on what shariah law IS

methodology? proof that this is a graph of imams? this is honestly Holla Forums-tier level stats, you should really know better

who are you quoting?

Are you a Muslim?

Surely there is a threshold, or otherwise all imaginable possible ideologies can be held within the purview of islam

And for the record, a lot of people seem to be arguing with me on the basis of "lol islam dumb" as if i'm advocating being a religious muslim instead of saying "maybe relying on converting 1.6b people isn't the most realistic way to spread class consciousness".

You know, maybe people who are still muslim can still gain class consciousness and still follow overall leftist practices without needing to be completely despooked (an honestly embarrassingly unrealistic goal). And that's assuming that the people pushing the idea that islam is incompatible with class consciousness actually mean well and aren't just advocating for genocide

Ali: Shariah is for beheading homosexuals
Mohamed:I disagree we need to be moderate and send them to jail for life
Osman:No it says in the Quran that gays should be thrown from buildings

Ah yes such disagreements

>pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf
Do you think muslims sit around and read the Quran all day? They hear this shit from their Imams.

Daily reminder

The only people who support Islamic immigration into the west are the labor aristocratic class (middle) and the exploiter class

what an intellectually dishonest response. do you believe that the average christian american's beliefs are indicative of the average christian pastor's beliefs? And yes, the average american christian doesn't get their ideas from rigorous interpretation of scripture either

I'm not even going to address the cringeworthy strawman that betrays your actual lack of knowledge on the topic

Negative, I am a Meat Popsicle.

If you'd been following this conversation, you would know that my position on this matter is that your mother is a Christian if she asserts she is a Christian. As far as I am concerned, that is the only qualification necessary because any other standard is not pragmatic.

Only people who support Islamic immigration into the West are sincere internationalists who don't want to divide working class.

Muslims are our comrades, not enemies. Ruling class is our common enemy.

...

Well Inshallah one day you will embrace Islamic Gommunism one day my friend.

Nice taqiyyah.

Not gonna lie, I thought I could be a Muslim socialist. But this thread has made it pretty fucking clear that I'm not welcome here. And it's not just "pol infiltrators" or tankies when there's over 100 replies of this same opinion.

See, that's I what I thought but it's clear Holla Forums doesn't feel that way. As a Muslim, literally everyone I know thinks capitalism sucks. And then from there, don't really think of alternatives because of all the capitalist propaganda (which fools workers of all creeds). I just stumbled upon leftists on Twitter, and from there, eventually became socialist.

This board has been useful in educating me, and learning the specific horrors of our current system. But it looks like everyone here fucking hates me, and thinks I'm a "reactionary" or the "real fascist", going as far as agreeing with the only Nazi in the thread. So I guess I either need to find a different forum, or just read theory and stick to myself. Thanks guys, for everything I've learned from this board.

Thanks for that, m8. It really means a lot to me, and I firmly believe that.

Best be joking.

Yes because the average Christian pastor isn't fire and brimstone but whatever I'm sure the majority of Islamic scholars are liberal.

If 90% of working class Europeans were Not Socialists would you want millions of them to move to "your country" and set up their own white nationalist zones?

notmycomrade

Apostate, and you will be.

Oh I never said she wasn't a christian. It's just doctrinaly she's actually closer to oriental church of the east than to Catholicism.

were sorry

Nice illiteracy.

if this isn't b8, then try a million other boards. Specifically those on reddit. They care a little too much for social justice and unrelated topics, but they'll accept you just fine as will most irl leftists.

Liberals aren't leftist.

A good third of which are actively arguing in support of you?
I mean it's fair to think you're not welcome here as unfortunate as it is but mere number of replies isn't exactly the right basis to go off that because how much of that is the same people replying to arguments to their previous posts

Anarchists love muslims.

Dude, probably half the people arguing against you are no doubt just shitposting. I keep posting in other threads about gulagging everyone and shit, but that's not my real opinion.

What? Why?

The memes. The dialectic is shit there and they're not as far left as we generally are, but most of them are anarcho-syndicalists or mutualists and you have the socdems trying to be edgy.

This tbh. I would consider myself more of a cultural Muslim but it seems people here still think that makes me deserving of being burnt on the people's cross. Sad, I legitimately do like this place but these threads always make me feel like shit

your religion throws liberty out the fucking window

Shunning religious people isn't leftist.
It's the action of a sectarian group of autists that don't want to form the coalition they need to succeed, and want to block out all the bits of the world they are uncomfortable with and lack the tools to deal with (basic social skills being one of them).

weird flag considering muslims aren't allowed here apparently

join any socialist org irl and see if any normies give af. protip: they don't

no we fucking don't

we just want you to abandon your religion and destroy the reactionary elements that plague society

I'm tired of this endless defensiveness from Muslims. Shape up and get your house in order.

...

We're not abandoning our religion. Never. Get that into your head.
I'd rather support literal Nazis instead of Communists if they let me keep my religion.

International worker solidarity even though the VAST VAST majority of muslims hate everything they stand for, don't expect sence from anarchists they love immigration laws a country like France has because ^^ but they'll sperg out if millions nazis moved into there country and set up nazi zones and didn't integrate at all.

Yep. The destruction of religion is a necessary and good part of socialism. It's up to Muslims to free themselves from the chains of supernatural nonsense.

Don't go, man. I mean, quite literally every thread consists of people shitting on whatever the topic is. We are politically incorrect after all, and we're fucking full of LARPers who use anonymity to let out their inner Yezhov. You have to not take criticism here too seriously.

Again the DIRECT WORDS of mohammad call for the deaths and subjugation of non belivers, insane hatred of women and imperialism. Oh not to mention the direct law in Islam for renouncing faith or god is death. Mohammad directly says "put them to death"

Thinking Islam is in any way compatable with the left when the religion is explicity clear what to do with us is fucking delusional.

Hundreds of thousands of comrades have been killed by "moderate islam" thinking Islamic people have secret humanist progressive westerners in them is not also just delusional its some noble savage tier bullshit.

Some ideaologies are just reactionary bullshit. Islam is one of them.

But go ahead and defend fascism the religion because western imperialism (just ignore that Islam collapsed into genocidal civil war basically the moment Mohammad died qhich led to the direct death of his faughter 6 months later)

This is extra retarded. The average muslim prole isn't going to give up their religion. End of fucking discussion. It is still possible to make them class conscious. If you don't think it is, it's just you being lazy

I'm a socialist

You think I have control over a billion and a half people?

The destruction of religion is not a necessary part of religion.

I see nothing wrong with this

Gender equality is just another example of "woke capitalism" where women compete with men in the labor force, driving wages down

You cannot have an egalitarian society when you give women the right to treat men unequally

my fucking sides. everyone is telling this guy he is reactionary and it is coming off reactionary af. get rid of your spooks friends

oh so this is another episode of "right wing nationalists are suddenly right when they're interpreting islam"

I bet those same people are suddenly super off about communism/socialism though. Really makes you think

FUCK

OFF

I side with LGBT. Not those that want to throw them off buildings or discriminate against them.

I'll throw you off a building you fucking cunt

t. Ahmed

Fuck your pedophile desert cult

Until they side with the left instead of liberalism, they're of no use to us. Their vain spooks are not entitled to a hearing. Have fun in your funky enclave.

holy shit you're autistic. how is "muslims all throw gays off buildings" any better than "socialists are about higher taxes and muh big gubmint"?

This is just you saying "some people who call themselves Muslims do bad stuff so hurr durr all bad". Despook yourself or fuck off back to Holla Forums

Well, someone did call communism "the new Islam".

ahh, the "I'm not a racist because Islam isn't a race" disguise finally slips off

On the whole i'm pretty sure muslims side with the left far more often than they side with liberalism. Within the west it's quite obvious and reasonable why they would prefer the liberalism that does not want to wipe them out to the liberalism that does want to wipe them out, really not fair to lay blame for that on them.

...

I don't know who's exploiting who anymore dot jaypeg

I just hope people weren't driven off the board by shitty trolls.

...

LGBT faggotry is a product of late capitalism.

Notice how major corporations, like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, are the biggest sponsors of the gay rights movement. So progressive.

The left is completely irrelevent today in the Post-Soviet world. The closest thing you have to a genuine left are more radical liberals like Sanders and Stein (in the US at least), and they are on the same page as neolibs on Islam, if not even more pro-Muslim

This. I got my whole mosque to vote for Bernie during the primaries

Then they'll have to be removed

Religious socialism is deluded, utopian, bourgeois, idealistic nonsense

You're not a socialist unless you embrace atheism and materialism

You can start by challenging the extremists, reactionaries, fundamentalists and bigots you know

Did I say something racist?

Virtue signalling. It attracts other virtue signalers.

jannies please ban everyone ITT

You didn't say something racist in of itself but you did say something that 99% of the time is said by racists so it's a pretty fair assumption that yeah you're a racist in the same way that it's a pretty fair assumption that the guy who's way way WAY too into playing as the nazis in WW2 wargames is a nazi

wew

How can you even call yourself a socialist if you don't oppose religion?

It is all utter nonsense that needs to be destroyed if we want true happiness, liberty and equality.

...

In your opinion. And what if it is? The way you're going to get there is by cyberbullying people who basically agree with large parts of your worldview?

Okay so you hate us and you always will. Fine, now what? You want us to side with you? Nah FUCK you. Your societies are crumbling so why would we want to be like you? You've got nothing to offer us.

This is the lefty equivalent of "we'll all be happy if we just kick all the darkies out"

Easy: I want the workers to take control of the means of production. Hence, socialist.

Where? Are you trying to say Islam doesn't condone Pedophillia and Mo wasn't a pedo?

KEK

What a fucking surprise

Go worship your Bosniak SS heroes then

What good is their agreement if they perpetuate s reactionary system of beliefs that results in deaths of thousands to this day?

here let me educate you plebs:

According to Tabari (also according to Hisham ibn ‘urwah, Ibn Hunbal and Ibn Sad), Ayesha was betrothed at seven years of age and began to cohabit with Prophet at the age of nine years. However, in another work, Al- Tabari says:

"All four of his (Abu Bakr's) children were born of his two wives - the names of whom we have already mentioned - during the pre-Islamic period."(REF: Tarikhu'l-umam wa'l-mamlu'k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara'l-fikr, Beirut, 1979)

If Ayesha was betrothed in 620 CE (at the age of 7 years) and started to live with Prophet in 624 CE or 2 AH (at the age of nine years), she was born in 613 CE [(Year of living with Prophet MINUS Ayesha’a age at that time of living with Prophet EQUALS the date of birth of Ayesha (624CE – 9 yrs = 613 CE)]. So, based on one account of Al-Tabari the numbers show that Ayesha must have born (613 CE) three years after the beginning of revelation (610 CE). And yet another place Tabari says that Ayesha was born in Pre-Islamic time (in Jahilliyyah). If she were born in pre-Islamic time (before 610 CE), she would have be at least 14 years old. So, Tabari contradicts himself. Therefore we can conclude that Al-Tabari is unreliable in the matter of determining Ayesha’s age.

According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah (ra) was born at the time the Ka`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old… she (Fatimah) was five years older that Ayesha (ra).” (REF: Al-isabah fi tamyizi'l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol. 4, P. 377, Maktabatu'l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh, 1978)

Its not bourgeois, it is literally feudal. Christians pioneered communes, trade unions etc in the Middle ages, and feudal society provided a better social safety net than the laissez faire industrial capitalist society that replaced it, until the advent of the welfare state at least

99% of atheists and materialists are liberals, if not outright autismo libertarians

(cont.)

So, based on Ibn Hajar, Fathima was born when Prophet was 35 years old and Ayesha was 5 years younger than Fathima. If Ibn Hajar’s statement is factual, Ayesha was born when Prophet was forty years old (Prophet’s age at the birth of Fathima PLUS 5 years = 40 years). If Ayesha was married to Prophet when he was 52 years old, Ayesha’ age at marriage would be 12 years (Prophet’s age at the time of marriage MINUS Prophet’s age at Ayesha’s birth (52 yrs – 40 years = 12 yrs). Ibn Hajar, Tabari and Ibn Hisham and Ibn Humbal contradict each other. So, the marriage of Ayesha at seven years of age is again contradicted.

Now you'll probably now be thinking "WAIT SO SHE WAS 12 THATS JUST AS BAD!". Hold on though it isn't that simple. According to Abda'l-Rahman ibn abi zanna'd:

“Asma (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha. (REF: Siyar A`la'ma'l-nubala', Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, p. 289, Arabic, Mu'assasatu'l-risalah, Beirut, 1992)

According to Ibn Kathir:
"She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by ten years". (REF: Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 371, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933)

According to Ibn Kathir:
"She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [i.e. 73 AH], as we have already mentioned, and five days later she herself died. According to other narratives she died not after five days but ten or twenty or a few days over twenty or a hundred days later. The most well known narrative is that of hundred days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old." (REF: Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir (died 1333), Vol. 8, Pg. 372, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933)

Way to out yourself as an infiltrator.

I love you anyway tankiebro.

(cont.)

According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani:
"She [Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH." (REF: Taqribu'l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Pg 654, Arabic, Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif, Lucknow)

According to almost all the historians Asma (ra), the elder sister of Ayesha (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha (ra). If Asma was 100 years old in 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijra (Asma’s age MINUS 73 hijrah EQUALS the age of Asma at the time of Hijrah(100 – 73 or 74 = 27 or 28)

If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of Hijrah, Ayesha (ra), being younger by 10 years, should have been 17 or 18 years old (Asma’s age at the time of Hijarah MINUS the age difference between Asma and Ayesha EQUALS the age of Ayesha at the time of Hijarh (27 or 28 –10 = 17 or 18 yrs)). Thus, Ayesha (ra), being 17 or 18 years of at the time of Hijra, she started to cohabit with Prophet between 19 to 20 years old (The Age of Ayesha at the time of Hijra + the year of Ayesha cohabiting with Prophet (19-20 + 1-2 Hijra) = The Age of Ayesha when she cohabit with Prophet (19 or 20 years).

Based on Hajar, Ibn Katir, and Abda'l-Rahman ibn abi zanna'd, age of Ayesha at the time living with Prophet would be 19or 20 years. We have now covered that Ibn Hajar suggests that Ayesha is 12 years old and then later he contradicts himself with a seventeen or eighteen-year-old Ayesha (ra). What is the correct age, twelve or eighteen? Clearly Ibn Hajar is an unreliable source for Ayesha’s age.

Keep in mind that European age of consent/marriage customs have historically skewed older than other regions and there was no dearth of criticism for Mohammed amongst Christian areas from the birth of Islam, yet the accusations of pedophilia are relatively recent. Why is it that no charge of pedophilia is written by Christian critics until many centuries later if these are such accepted facts? Surely his contemporaries or at least church members in the proceeding couple of centuries would have used this ammunition against the rising new religion.

Genuine leftists are pro childlove

prove me wrong

what the fuck are you on about?

so arab = muslim? or is islam "not a race so i can't be racist?"

pick one instead of deflecting with "just bantz"

Aren't you supposed to be calling them rasin heads or abeeds instead on darkies?

Either way someone who is perfect doesn't marry a 7 year old.

How the fuck am I cyberbullying? Criticising a religion isn't bullying ffs

No, there are other issues, but religion is a huge obstacle

trolls trolling trolls

We had better threads before when we were not the 3rd largest board on Holla Forums. I'm usually critical of Islam*and all religion) but this thread is more of a sign of Holla Forumss huge increase of membership over the last couple of weeks and has suffered shitposting from sides all over the internet.

Communist regimes killed far many more than Muslims have.

I feel no solidarity with shari'a pieces of shit.

it's the same guy you illiterate dipshit

…that's how I know you didn't read it. It shows that the ONE guy who says 9 contradicts himself at every other occasion, and that no one else can back up 9 as the correct age

Keep spewing memes back like a child though. Everyone else is convinced of your superior intellectual prowess when you throw a tantrum that you have no good retort, surely

What are you even talking about?
If someone said t. pierre to a french person would that be racist?

Ah yes the anti "stalinist" """"""left"""""".

You know not everyone speaks English as a first language right? Fucking racist.
How fucking racist of you.

Socialism means equality and no oppression or exploitation. Islam, like all religion, is fundamentally incompatible with that.

Good thing no one here advocates it then. I mean I think religion is reactionary too, but as long as it's not someone's prime ethos, he's okay.

1. This isn't true.
2. Muslims have a history of deliberately committing genocide.

Turkey, the most "Western" of muslim countries, committed 3 genocides in 13 years.

Islam, like all religion, is not fundamentally incompatible with that.

yes, all french people speak french. not all muslim people speak arabic. the fact that you can't understand that betrays your stupidity

This

Irreligious and leftist Arabs/Persians/Turks/Kurds etc? Great.

Religious ones? Nah

Into the trash compactor of history.

Turkey did so in the pursuit of the western ideal of a Secular Nation-State. It was actively BECAUSE of turkey's westernness, not in spite of it.

To be clear, I (>>1325881) am not this guy.

Europeans did it too would be a less laughable defense if Europeans worshiped ancient European pedophiles, holding them to be representatives of a timeless and immortal god. Why should a man of god be held to contemporary standards? Shouldn't we be able to hold a man of god to any just standard we can conceive of?

If a supposed man of god is to be held to a contemporary standard but falls short of modern standards, why should such a man be listened to?

Disturbing if true.

Racist Arabs call niggos 3abeed, it has nothing to do with actual religious teachings. In fact, some of the most hardcore Muslims tend to be black, and see no contradiction to being a strict Muslim and black.

The "raisin head" thing is from a Hadith that talks about the necessity of following a legitimate Muslim leader, even if he is black, and even if he is unattractive to the point his head looks like a raisin. It has nothing to do with calling blacks in general raisin heads. Just a hypothetical example to demonstrate the necessity of following legitimate Muslim authority

>According to ~Tabari~ … Ayesha was betrothed at seven years of age and began to cohabit with Prophet at the age of nine years. However, in another work, ~Al- Tabari~ says:

Your primary language is irrelevant to the fact you missed this super basic premise

Communism killed 50 million in one sitting, don't sanitise it.

Your reading comprehension is extra dim if you think a passage saying "Europeans specifically had a higher age of consent" means "Europeans did it too"

It means the very opposite, shit for brains

Islam started killing 1400 years ago, and never stopped.

You mean like popes?

youtube.com/watch?v=uti-Lg_TVgw

Because the religion commands it

Its still less than what communists did in 70 years

The Russian Civil war killed over a million people alone, and much of it was Lenin killing rival leftist groups

>Islam, like all monotheistic religion, is fundamentally incompatible with that.
Monotheism is a code for religious supremacy. Polytheists who are open to the existence and worship of other gods outside their personal pantheon are ideal.

the entire history of religion and the way it is used by the ruling classes proves you wrong

even if it could have its meaning changed, religion is only ever an illusion and an impediment to freedom and rationalism

Which is why you support the banning of both Christianity and Islam?

Come on liberal you're nearly there

Can you point me to the part where this was central to my point? What the fuck are you screeching about?

what a surprise

Good thing they defeated Communism then, seeing as it killed at 100 times the pace of Islam.

You'll hear no defense of Catholicism from me! Will you continue to defend Islam?

You better love cold nights in Siberia too.

t. Holla Forums

Funny how all the biggest anti-religionists (eg Dawkins, Harris, etc) are hardcore liberals and not leftists

...

Judging your flag, you unironically admire Enver Hoxha?

they don't actually do anything to stamp out religion

people like Stalin and Hoxha did for good reason

That's what muslims say to me, when I bring up a specific verse they always reply with "You don't speak arabic so you'll never be able to understand it".

Funny how all the pro muslims are sheltered middle class idiots and porkies.

Only if you're there to cuddle with me.

lol what? The passage says "it's unlikely this is true or it would have been used as ammunition against him by christians at the time (who were NOT pedophiles)

How are you not embarrassed by how badly you mangled the interpretation of the passage? Did you even read it?

I admire his treatment of religion

There's a reason Albania doesn't have the problems plaguing most Muslim countries

Who cares, argue with what I'M saying to you or admit you're fighting strawman who aren't here.

…so you admit Albania is still mostly a Muslim country and doesn't have problems? How is that not a refutation of your fundamental arguments?

This fucking thread.

What Europeans did or did not do is irrelevant. What matters is the present. Islam's prophet falls short of all modern standards, he can only look good in historic context. But a man who only looks good in historic context is clearly not to be taken as a representative of a timeless god.

But of course most Muslims are only Muslims because their parents were, it's silly to act as though it was a rational decision. Tradition, rather than rational decision. Is tradition entitled to respect?

holy shit wtf is wrong with tankies. and his post clearly shows he's still socialist, but can't post here because of autistic fedoras like you

only because religion was stamped upon

before that it was horrific. it was a tribal fucking wasteland where women were treated like property

and it still has problems, just not as much as the wahhabist countries

So Hindu Caste system, Aztec human sacrifices, Tibetan Bhuddist feudalism, etc are all kosher now?

Or do you think Middle Class white liberals who dabble in New Age to be the ideal way of living?

quran.com/4/34
"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."

Honestly? I would. I love Alaska too. Nothing warms my heart like the biting cold.

The entire passage is a refutation of the fact that he was a pedophile at all, and the addendum at the end simply adds another point that, if it were true, it would have been used against him

You seem awfully confused and like you just quickly skimmed the last section

wtf does this have to do with a charge of pedophilia? are you even having the same conversation as me or are you just talking to yourself with me as a useful springboard to screech at?

liberal detected

So you're defending sexism in the Quran?

I'm something of a fan of the Hindu religious system, it seems really neat! I can't say I know enough about the Aztec religious system to pass any sort of judgement on it.. I don't really trust what the Spanish had to say about it. Are Bhuddist polytheists? I thought they were more of an atheistic-ish religion. I'd love to read more about it. New Age liberals are annoying, but they seem harmless enough. I've got no beef with them.

Reactionary ALERT!

Well it's been an honor LARPing with you tonight but I'm off to sleep.

I hope no one has been driven off because of shitposters. I love every single one of you. Don't let the trolls grind you down.

That's where we are today. What about in 10 or 20 or 100 or 200 years when society has changed again and he ends up looking good? LMAO at you thinking this is some apex of civilisation though. Get real lad, it's fucked.

Nah fam, Nazi. I'm a modern progressive urbanite Nazi.

Are you defending LIBERAL feminism?

...

Worship him then. Don't expect respect from me if you worship him today.

You know as well a I do there's a ton of contention as to what this verse means, and bringing it up in a conversation explicitly about pedophilia betrays that you are confident you cannot defend your original position and must deflect and derail

We don't worship Muhammad, we worship Allah.

"modern values" are a direct product of late capitalism.

...

Most of Holla Forums and the altright crowd are just racist liberals. They are scared of shitskins undermining their Western liberal utopia

I'm a nice guy, really!

Yeah, sure you don't. You bunch aren't called Mohammedans for nothing.

I'm defending feminism.

Tell me one interpation that isn't sexist, surely if there's a ton you'll be able to find at least ONE.

Don't fucking try to masquerade your reactionary bullshit by decrying something as a " product of late capitalism" instead of "degeneracy".

Oh no I'll have to get through my day knowing a pretend Nazi on the communist wing of a chinese knock off of a Korean cartoon forum doesn't respect me.

Polytheists are retarded too. There's a reason it died off in the first millennium AD.

literally one google search a way from dozens of explanations

Here's two i found after literally 5 seconds of searching and which you will "refute" by saying "muh" and "dindu" a lot. Just admit you don't know nearly as much as you think you do.

quranverse434.com/
submission.org/friday_no_such_thing_as_wife_beating_in_quran.html

tell that to the hindus

lol cowardly deflection. Just admit you had no answer to the original topic and no defense to using "hurr pedophile desert cult" as an insult

Late capitalism is literally degenerate tho

Feminism and LGBT are products of modern capitalism, where reproduction is devalued, while consumer choice is given a premium, because it creates more consumer demand and business opportunities for capitalists

I swear guys tankies aren't all this bad, don't judge them like they judge us

A backwards people who worship cows and treat women awfully.

I mean it's pretty clearly not shitposting. Shitposting is in a playful manner, while most of these tankies are unironically in support of violent suppression of Muslims. Of course people are being driven off, and it's no wonder we still are incapable of forming an internationalist movement.

>quranverse434.com/
Read the fucking links before you post them.

ReLIEgion BTFO XDDDDDDD

Is your solution to toss the LGBT off buildings and to slap the feminists into submission?

I dont take their judgements seriously. They are far more cucked by the scrapheap of history than we are

I did, where's your defense of your shitty "humans vs orcs" tier racism? Did you maybe just want to deflect?

Or how you judge women and non-muslims?

oh wow fedora memes, must be 2009 in here

coming from the theist

Absolutely

Listen to Common Filth

Its not like Leninists were a bunch of vegans either

You clearly spend a lot of time around Muslims, do you feel they're judging you?

Permissive polytheists in a world packed full of militant monotheists are definitely going to experience some trouble, that's for sure!

you have the wrong flag anyway lmao

how does it feel knowing that you can be judged as this retarded since people with your beliefs think this unironically?

Wow, that's really racist.

They should be brought up religious and to respect and obey their husbands and to be good mothers.

They will be made to pay the jizya tax and keep their heads down in the presence of Muslims

...

No you didn't because there's not an interpretation that links which disproves the fact that IT IS sexist. Are you saying it isn't sexist to say men and women aren't equal and you should lightly beat your wife? lmao lmao lmao
It's just a fact
Marxist-Leninists (Elven)
Radical leftist anti theists (Humans)
Liberals (Dwarfs)
Religious and right wing (Orcs)

Not big surprise.

at this point it's under 20 layers of irony, but you're still a retard who keeps getting btfo and moving the goalposts

There are more Muslims in the world than unironic communists

lmao literally "violence is always unacceptable against the weak women :🍀🍀🍀" tier liberal bullshit

You should be embarrassed to call yourself a tankie

Pretty sure you're just trolling, if not, fuck off to Saudi Arabia

You sound like an anarchist

how are bunkers not literally basements? sounds like revisionism tbh

He doesn't have the flag, while the other guy used the flag for every post. How are you such a fucking idiot

No because I'm superior to them in every way.

How is that not sexist?

Plus what happens if they don't want to?

Ah yes the religion of equality.

fucking lol, let this post stand as a monument to anyone who thinks this isn't a troll

We'd stream it too, just to make you madder. Faggot.

No I'm against beating your wife because she disobeys you, get it right next time.

In a basement the tendies are kept upstairs in the kitchen, but in a bunker you store the tendies underground with you.

You want me to get out the uniform?

Nobody has proved me wrong

Yes the world is fucked up, what else is new?

Bunkers are for anti imperialist and antifascist protection

Women were equal in Hoxha's Albania

topkek

Tankies are hobbits

...

This thread is just perfect proof that islam is completely incompatiable with leftist values.

When mohammad says put non belivers to death and beat women he actually means give them hugs guyzzzz you just dont understand the original arabic context.

Maybe when you have to rely on infowars tier reading comprehension to engage in mental gymnastics needed to just make Islam sound mildly less genocidal and woman hateric, maybe your ideology is fascist shit.

Atheistic socialist authoritarianism is Good™

Religious Oppression and hierarchy is not

Take a pic so we can make fun of your physique.

In praxis, not theory.

...

The fucking truth right here

Put this on your wall folks

...

I assumed we were talking about Europe, given that's all Nazis care about

I mean all I saw in this thread is 1/3 normal well-adjusted socialists who leave their basement, 1/3 muslims who don't want to be massacred by autistic tankies, and 1/3 tankie losers

...

You have no right to put your hands on your wife unless in self defence you fucking muzzrat.

lmao kiddo you can't be a ML if you don't work out and smoke drugs we aren't anarkiidies

considering "leftists values" mean forcing people to abandon their religion you're right, we're not compatible.

It's 2017 who doesn't have a microwave?

Lmao why the fuck do tankies always take the most autistic position in any argument? Literally no moderation

Isn't that what praxeology's all about?

Then take a pic. You can cover your face (but there's really no point, since you probably don't have a job to get fired from. After all, you're a tankie.)

she has every right to hit me back and

implying I'm even muslim, I'm not. I just know how easy it is to BTFO screeching wanna-be crusaders

BASED

I think you are trolling. I mean, seriously, who literally believes in communism after 70 years of failure?

Women in Islam are respected, but are expected to follow gender roles outlined by the sharia.

They however, are still free, even encouraged to pursue a career, become educated, and become proficient in the martial arts

If they dont want to, they may be forced. Sorry, but the survival of society is more important than individual whims (only a liberal would disgaree)

Islam only advocates equality for Muslims only, not for non-Muslims.

Its not like communists believe that non-party members should be equal with party members

Apostasy is an option, and deportation is the main alternative. What's wrong with you?

They really are the dumbest people on the planet. No wonder the right-wingers always use them as the representation of the left.

You sound like a rich Christian trying to rationalize why the text that clearly denounces wealth is actually saying that Christians should seek to become rich.

youtube.com/watch?v=AdH2DGSXjss

Post a picture of your face then I'll post one of mine.

t. Spencer

How I treat my wife is not the business of the state

Sorry pal but Holla Forums isn't your space for Islamig Anargism :DDD

We're proletarians, socialists, atheists and republicans.

Except the ones who don't want to conform to your desert cult.
Which is sexist.

I'm not christian and none of the ancestors I know of have been for hundreds of years either. What even is this talking point?

Wtf is actually wrong with you, you tankie cancer? Do you realize that even New Atheists are looking at you like you're fucking nuts?

Is he /ourguy/?

So you're Richard Spencer, basically. Got it.

...

I asked you first moron

moar

the video wouldn't continue the christianity point if it was just an analogy

or maybe you think analogies don't need to actually make a comparative case to something else?

In the end the Commies lost and religion remains.

It is a place for spookposting and communism is a massive spook, fyi

true tbh

yup. Not a tumblrina, so I see no issue with this

see

you're either posting with the wrong flag or need to rethink your positions. Maybe try the feminist flag or the democrat flag?

Hoaxa didn't go far enough he should have cut tounges of priests impale people who are promoting religion etc you know…send a massage

kek tankies btfo

See, this is why people are doubly uneasy about Muslim immigration.

literally fighting idpol with idpol lmfao

k mo

I'm not a third worldist.

He would have still been cucked by a million other things plaguing communist Albania. Like continuing to waste tons of money on useless bunkers, or the breakup of the Eastern bloc

The video is illustrative of Christian mental gymnastics, which remind me of the Muslim mental gymnastics I am seeing in this thread.

things sure are ripe for your glorious worker's revolution in the first world

What the fuck is New Atheism?

Look if you want to reach a socialist society as quickly as possible, the suppression of religious bullshit that deludes the people is a good way to do it.

I have no sympathy for clerics.

all the wiki pages on the Soviet Anti Religious campaigns are glorious

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-religious_campaign_during_the_Russian_Civil_War

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USSR_anti-religious_campaign_(1928–41)

how convenient that this means you no longer have to argue actual points

people make bad arguments so people against me are making bad arguments QED

Did I say I was against third worldism?

...

Look, Islam is as wrong as Christianity but they aren't being butchered.

Did I say I was against third worldism?

Are you implying non-Muslim whites are not also sexist?

Let the kuffar be uneasy with us, we are not here to please them

I admitted the are sexist. I will argue that most women prefer it tho over liberal egalitarian anomy

SJWs have many internal conflicts tbh. I mean, some of the biggest anti-tranny types are radical feminists, for example

cmon son

Bullshit. It's like people pretending to care about halal slaughter while buying fur. Completely transparent hypocrisy.
They're uneasy about muslim immigration due to years of conditioning.

did i say you said you were against third worldism? I made fun of you for not being one while being a tankie, and you said you aren't one

also fucking lol at

idpolers are all the same

I came from 4/lit/ tbh

Kek'd

It's really not an argument worthy of anything more than mockery.

fascinating

You'll be a Leninist soon my friend

there are a lot of Marxists on 4/lit.

yeah but there's some difference between academic marxists and just marxists

I wouldn't know, I don't go there

/his/ has a fair few Marxists. I enjoy arguing with Holla Forumsyps and liberals on there

...

...

this comic should be the only response ever to "but these people are totally different!" shitposters

That's a strawman.

yeah well theists fetishise the east and foreign cultures

I very much doubt this.

the way religion and nationalism are used by elites and the ruling class is the same across the world

Sure, but let's not start confusing the paranoid saudi-types that are trying to control the islamist lunatics among their population for exploitative porkies.

…therefore, you are misrepresenting my argument and do not claim otherwise, which means we can put this to rest

Down with the house of Saud

name one difference between ISIS and Holla Forumstypes that isn't explained by ISIS types being poorer on average?

ISIS actually do shit

the Saudis are Porkies

…yeah, poorer people are more desperate and are driven to action

that's my whole point, if Holla Forumstards ever had their NEET lifestyle threatened they'd join the first autist cult they could

Sure, but House of Saud is literally the bad guy keeping an even badder guy at bay.

Their welfare system is the most generous one in the world. But 80% of their workers (1/3 of the population) are foreigners. The businesses simply don't want to hire the natives, and the natives don't want to work most jobs, because they think it's beneath them. Consequently, foreign workers are treated as slaves. Same goes for Qatar and UAE.

Arab culture is fucking awful. And I do not consider KSA natives to be proles.

Because they are stupid as shit.

Who else jerked off when they saw Dubai die in Spec Ops the Line?

Their oil enables them to have only the finest little boys for sexy time.

Literally house of Saud propaganda. They spend millions funding extremist theological schools and support attacks on moderate ones, and actively work to keep virulent wahabbism the "default" islam in the region in order to justify their hold and influence on the region

Without them of course those strains wouldn't even be a thing, but that's not something you're supposed to talk about. Surely the rich benefactors have our best interests at heart, at least THEY THEMSELVES don't believe that crazy stuff, right?

I've lived with some saudi royal family members for a time. Believe me, if you knew what they were up to and responsible for you wouldn't maintain this stance

What are you saying?

Tell us what they did.

this

Abroad. Are you sure they aren't trying to get the radicals out of their own country?

I'm not saying they are some misunderstood anti-heroes or that they shouldn't get theirs as other porkies deserve.

I'm saying that in KSA, the aftermath of toppling the House of Saud would be absolutely catastrophic.

If it was some sort of western intervention or a Islamist revolt then yeah,it would be like Iraq after Sadam

Most of them are just the absolute peak stereotype of bourgie pigs. Flaunting their wealth and their oppression of workers as references

Laughing about the imams that they got to spread X message to Y village for them. Passing around a teapot with alcohol in it around a room full of saudi royalty and their in-their-pocket imams, and laughing that "remember, I told the plebs that God can't see it if it's in a teapot" and laughing uproariously. Laughing at people begging for food on the streets and mocking westerners for falling for their propaganda hook line and sinker.

You can believe me or not, but let me just say that if I put people from this board in a room with them for just an hour, no one would argue about whether or not 99% of them deserve a rope and there'd be no hesitation in emancipating the people under their thumb.

That is exactly why they must be toppled.

How did you end up living with them?

come on, you know better than that

you don't get extremists out of your country by funding the creation of more extremists out of your country

and that still wouldn't justify persecution of more moderate practicing shools

I can absolutely guarantee you that their excuses are just that, excuses. In the end they're playing for their own geopolitical leverage and power like everyone else and are about as sincere as George "we need to spread freedom to Iraqis in the name of God" W Bush when they talk about how well-meaning they are

Islamists lurk in the shadows of regular muslims, everywhere. It's one of the reasons I argue against Islam. You use the word "if", as if there are other alternatives.

Look, as fun as the Holla Forums generals would be, as the world scrambles for Saudi oil, I'd rather not see the shi'a (who live on top of all the oil) get moderately headchopped.

Not surprising tbh

What do you know about the Sunni shuyukh they imprison? Is it because of political opposition or something else?

Is there no way that the king or whatever and his heir could get offed? It would be glorious watching them cannibalise each other.

What are you, some kind of reformist?

Some years back I was fully submerged in the "muh job creators and business owners" meme and was doing business in Saudi because of an open market relevant to my expertise. Can't go into more detail because I don't want to doxx myself but if you go up the chain for a bit you'd be surprised how easily you can be accepted in their circles.

After looking at wahhabis, and what they do. I'm not sure I can see the House of Saud as anything other than just shoving victims into the maw of radicals, or risk getting eaten themselves.

You forgot the deaths at Hajj. That was manslaughter so a prince could get to drive around the Kaaba…. yeah, exactly.

They imprison people for a mix of political and ideological reasons. Some of those imprisoned will be your typical violent islamist but operating too close for comfort for those in charge, but a distressingly large population of them were just preaching the wrong thing in the wrong place or actively fighting against their interests while being entirely peaceful

Not so long as they prove a useful ally to American hegemony

Believe me the global power structure all ties together, it's never as simple as taking down a couple of people at the top in one country

you miss my point. without them, wahabbism isn't a thing

they create their own boogiemen and then prop them up as an excuse for their actions.

The fuck is this thread ?
why saddam & khadafi die for this ?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism
fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutazilisme

Ex-Muslim living in an Arab country here.

Islam is totally opposed to leftist values.

but the thing is when people talk about how bad Islam it's generally as a way to put off people from a certain area like me even if they are not Muslim or are but don't know much about Islam nor agree with it.

George Bush was sincere. So sincere he completely turned off the French about it by going on about he was enacting biblical prophecy*

*Prophecy's actual biblical basis very very tenuous.

Without Saudi and Qatari (or USA, sadly) wealth, Wahhabism can't be reproduced at scale. Planck's Law of Attrition takes care of the rest.

Imagine how much better off our Bolivarian comrades would be with KSA's oil offline.

Leftist, or liberal?

both tbqh

it was more important for W to get the christians in his own nation on his side than it was to convince the french.

Dumb George W Bush was a meme. Puppetmaster Cheney was a meme. Literally everything about their administration was manufactured to shift around blame and minimize responsibility for their own actions

All he had to do to keep BOTH on side was not talk about gog and Magog being at work in Iraq in a private conversation to the French president.
The only reason to do so is genuinely seeing gog and Magog at work in Iraq.

don't let neocons off the hook

Replace muslims with islamists and it is okay.

You might have noticed we have a recurring problem with Holla Forumsyps genuinely doing their best to shit up the board.

Germony. YES!

wew

While I agree with you about oragnised religion, I disagree that it would just disappear if you abolish the state. Then I also don't see the abolition of the state as anything realistic. Maybe I'm just a pessimist.

Apostates should be killed tho.

I hope you get doxxed tbh. Or Trump nukes your ass and does our job for us, that good kaffir goy

shalom