Why is that "material conditions" are brought up every time a muslims bombs something/someone? ISIS and other islamic jihadist leaders had university diplomas and were fairly well off. Do you seriously think muslims need good healthcare, a house and money so that they don't blow things up?
That's why I think we must ally with far-right nationalists to fight Islam. We could handle the far-rights easily after.
Other urls found in this thread:
We shouldn't ally the far-right, we should break the far-right monopoly on combating islam. It also helps not bombing them.
Nice try /pol
But user neoliberals are running the countries now.
at least try and google alienation before you make a bait thread
Not a bait thread.
What do I have to even google? 9/11 bombers were rich saudis, ISIS leader has a university diploma, Bin Laden was an engineer and so on.
Give me a real answer.
???
Surprised you don't team up with ISIS
Western far-right is definitely more progressive and dont cut heads.
What's your point?
*doesn't
Compared to ISIS lmao
Because it does have to do with material conditions. A lot of Islamic terrorism is displacement. For instance, the Taliban arms tenants to rise up against their powerful landlords. They are not much unlike fascists who displace their hatred of capitalism onto Jews.
You're not likely to win either group over. Often it goes the other way, where once genuine leftists fall into displacement.
none of that disputes the material conditions argument.
By material conditions people usually mean ISIS is the (almost) direct result of the destruction of Iraq, not because people are poor. ISIS can be defeated in many ways, allying with fascist is nor one of them. Do solidarity work with YPG if you're actually interested in crushing ISIS for good
no, now fuck off back to >>>Holla Forums
Leadership is not representative.
...
Kill the saudis tbh
Yeah working with zionists to get rid of islamists sure sounds like a great idea
Manchester Attack? Nice Attack?
Epic xD
America and its allies are the only thing funding terrorism. It has always been this way.
I too like to type meme words when I don't have any arguments to present
Saudi imperialism is a thing, you know. Global Salafism is pretty much a product of Gulf oil money. You can blame the CIA as well. Whenever faced with a choice between middle eastern moderate leftists/nationalists and hardcore islamists, the USA invariably goes for the islamists.
nah, they beat people up, stab them and shoot them instead
Right, Abedi, a disaffected youth, the child of poor immigrants, and radicalized in the hellhole that is Libya after the US and the West destroyed it, has nothing to do with material class.
You are again point to individuals that are not representative of the majority that makes up Islamic terror groups.
the profiles for alt right spergs and salafis are eerily similar. alienated middle class 'beta males', STEM, attempt to escape from their shitty lives via vidya and internet LARPing.
The British government actually knew what Abedi was up to, they gave him permission to go to Lybia to fight for the 'moderate rebels' back when he was still under 18. This is literal blowback from NATOs destabilization efforts. Same thing happens to Saudi all the time, some of your salafi crazies will end up turning against you.
Sometimes it's material conditions like poverty, sometimes it's just alienation, someone's neither alienated or impoverished and they fall for a cancerous​ ideology
Either way, denying refugees safe Haven is a greater evil than some terrorist attacks.
pic related