Islamic Communism

Wow its insane how marxist this is, in an even more explicit way then christianity afaik.

Red Islam is something I know has existed in the past. I think it had some influence in the Islamic revolution.

wtf I love sharia now

A muslim scholar gave a speech about socialism in Islam. Here's an excerpt. His name is Hatem Bazian. In the full speech he even suggests that Muslim communities copy off of the socialist enterprise model public ownership like the Arizmendi Bakery in Oakland

Full speech for those interested
youtube.com/watch?v=FYd7tq5PEjk

most commie parties in the islamic world have been sabotaged by US-backed fundies, but interestingly enough leftism was a big part of the iranian revolution

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Shariati

From death to infidels to share the fruits of your labor with infidels who have less it's a pretty fucking big jump.

Inshallah red Islam will rise again.

it's still alive and well in pakistan, even with the US trying to beat it down for the better part of 4 decades

islam is against capitalism. pro-capitalist Muslims will argue that it arose in a society that was mercantile but that doesn't mean anything. the hoarding of wealth and excess is against the religion lol

daesh/isis does not represent islam. i know you're being ironic but just want to clear that up.

I completely agree with you, but I'm saying you can have a real and impactful dichotomy between the real teachings in an ideology and the practiced results in a variety of ways. To bring about the socialist strains of islam certain power structures whose interests lie counter to red islam must be removed or radically changed/weakened.

Wahhabists, I think not, since it's basically an ideology controlled by the Saudis, aka the porkies porkys to ever pork.

Maybe, but why would you want to? It's like saying "you don't need to believe in Jesus Christ in order to be a Christian".

What do you think is easier? Despooking 1.6 billion people entirely or reworking their ideology towards a more productive goal?

Keep in mind that's essentially what happened with the emergence of suicide bombing in islam, which was entirely contradicted by actual textual islamic teachings. It didn't matter though, because higher ups told people it was islamic.

Obama pulled it off for 8 years!

Well, it's the old reformism vs revolution debate all over again, isn't it? And the left has only been (barely) successful with the latter.

Mohamed was a warlord when he wasn't fucking 9 year olds in the ass. I really doubt a book about him lacks in passages ordering his followers to murder his adversaries.
Then it doesn't matter what the book says, now does it? They've been attacking us for centuries, if nobody read the book in the meantime I don't think anyone ever will.

a holy book and a religion are to different things

Lol why don't you leave this conversation to the adults and you can find a little playground for memers. According to the guy who made the claim about the marriage ages, his wife would have also simultaneously had to have been 12, 15, 16, 19, and 21. Her dad would have been 10 years older than her but also 50 years older than her. And the "in the ass" addition betrays just how childish your mentality is white the "warlord" meaningless epithet is basically liberal tier "violence is always bad" whinging.

Seriously, there's a million reasons to meaningfully and reasonable critique any religion but you do yourself absolutely no favors by arguing like a child.

Probably, and this is true for all religions. Which would directly contradict the usefulness of sperging out about the religious exegesis in the first place

Lol wat. So if you object to warmongering you must reject all violence in all causes. Muslim logic.

What could possibly go wrong?

Carlos the Jackal wrote a book supporting global Jihad as a way to bring down capitalism and usher in Marxism. (Never translated into English, though.)

Other than that I don't see much crossover.

If you think "muslim logic" includes a statement like "[what the book says] probably doesn't matter" than your critical thinking skills are broken on a fundamental level. Tell me, what seperates a "warlord" from any other person who wages war? Is all war bad? Is all violence bad? What's the difference?

You see, if you're not a liberal you usually have a good or at least internally consistent guiding principle on these ideas.

OPIATE OF THE FUCKING MASSES

Islam is more like bath salts of the masses.

the Islamic fundamentalist movement arose due a combination of a reaction to Western dirty wars and direct funding of these movements by economic powers.

Islam as a religion itself is irrelevant, like any religion it is ambiguous enough to be molded to support or oppose whatever the political movement of the day is

well fuck

No no this thread is about Islam not tsarist Russia

The only ongoing socialist state in existence rn is mostly muslim

Are you just not sure how *IQ works? Because if I had to guess relative today I'd put the agrarian backwater of pre-communist russia as roughly 80 by today's standards

You mean how Stalin masqueraded state captialism as communism/socialism? Not just religion can be molded for an agenda, buddy.

Agreed 100% my man

Sage

Sage

Mod

Jesus sage

This is unlikely to happen within Salafi inspired groups, because they are so steeped in Saudi thinking, and Saudi has consistently promoted an anti-socialist pro-capitalist version of Islam.

Outside of that groups like PLO and similar were inspired by secular Marxist revolutionaries. They are ever shrinking minority though.

what are the sources for the second and third texts?

This is a bad translation. The actual passage in context is talking about being served what is due by God on the day of judgement.

Again, terrible translation. The actual translation says They ask thee how much they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs."

corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=219

16:71 and 7:199 is entirely wrong

corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=71

corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=7&verse=199

51:19 is more interesting. The translation is wrong but the actual text says the poor should be assigned a portion of the wealth.

Pickthall: And in their wealth the beggar and the outcast had due share.
Mohsin Khan: And in their properties there was the right of the beggar, and the Mahrum (the poor who does not ask the others)

corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=51&verse=19

Correct. It's a severe warning against hoarding wealth.
corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=9&verse=34

Correct.

What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to Allah,- to His Messenger and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you.

corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=59&verse=7