6 ms·

Such a loaded article (Quote from article "The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. ") making its way to the top of Hacker news (which sh

by _nedR 11y ago

Such a loaded article (Quote from article "The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. ") making its way to the top of Hacker news (which shuns political articles like the plague) is very troubling to me as a Muslim. Seems like the Muslims of 2015 are basically moving to the position of the Jews of 1915.

musha68k 11y ago
Thank you for your comment _nedR! I agree, the focus should be more on the potential perniciousness of unchecked religious fundamentalism in general (it doesn't matter if it's the KKK or ISIS) and middle-east history of the last 15-30 years in particular (why do some people fall for such simplistic, de-humanizing organizations)? ISIS is essentially a fascist movement and has as little to do with main-stream islamic values as the KKK has with christian ones. You might find this article on the "why" less simplistic: http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-interviewing-isis-prisoners/ http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-inte... I think putting time and effort into these kinds of political and religious discussions is very important as long as we keep a cool and open mind - love and understanding against potential fear and hate towards "others" so to speak. Peace! :)
dragontamer 11y ago
I agree it is loaded, but after the Paris attacks, people are scared. So I hope you can be understanding at this time. I went to school with Muslims during 9/11 (not many, but enough that I listened to them). I understand the frustration in your religion being singled out, misinterpreted and so forth.
planck01 11y ago
>Seems like the Muslims of 2015 are basically moving to the position of the Jews of 1915. Except that the Jews of 1915 were not blowing up, mas-murdering nor terrorizing people, nor were they waging war on non-Jews. Also, Jews were prosecuted throughout the world and eventually deported and/or killed, while Muslims are not in any way. Concluding, it is not alike in any way.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Except that the Jews of 1915 were not blowing up, mas-murdering nor terrorizing people, nor were they waging war on non-Jews. Yeah, the rise in Zionist terrorism in Palestine was about 20 years after that.
  - planck01 11y ago
    That is one similarity between Jews and Isis Muslims, they both claim a country based on their religious texts. I don't know what you try to frame as 'Zionist terrorism'. I am not a fan of many Israeli actions, but as far as I know there were no structural attempts of structurally terrorizing and brutalizing Palastinians by Israel that are in any way similar to what we see Isis doing today.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > I don't know what you try to frame as 'Zionist terrorism'. Acts of terrorism, including deliberate bombings, gunning down of civilians, etc., carried out by supporters of an independent Jewish state within what was then Mandatory Palestine by groups such as Irgun (a direct linear ancestor of the modern Likud Party.) > I am not a fan of many Israeli actions, but as far as I know there were no structural attempts of structurally terrorizing and brutalizing Palastinians by Israel Israel was largely built by people who engaged in terrorizing and brutalizing Palestinians in the name of the goal of creating the State of Israel. (To be fair, there was terrorism on both sides and organized terrorism on the Arab side against the Jewish side started first. But if we accept that targeting innocent civilians for terror is acceptable as long as someone did it to you first, well, most terrorist groups in history could point to someone who they saw as terrorizing the population they purport to represent first, and characterize their own terrorism as retribution against the group from which those attacks came, and supporters and sympathizers.)
- _nedR 11y ago
  >Except that the Jews of 1915 were not blowing up, mas-murdering nor terrorizing people, nor were they waging war on non-Jews. You are saying that if a small subset of Jews were blowing up, mass-murdering and terrorizing people (which they did during the zionist insurgency, and are also doing today), That means that would justify the persecution of the world's Jews and the general anti-semitic sentiment of the mainstream during that period?
dang 11y ago
In case it helps (I'm a moderator at HN), every user who is here in the spirit of intellectual curiosity belongs here. That includes our Muslim users as much as all others. We have a large, international community, so tolerance of differences is critical. It's ok to explore the specifics of the current situation if one does so civilly and substantively. But when someone attacks Islam per se, that is a religious flamewar and we tell them it is not allowed: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20religious%20flamewar https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=.... The goal is to avoid flamewars whose vitriol is exceeded only by tedium—the same thing we seek to avoid everywhere. Since Rumi is no less Islamic than ISIS, the discussions this excludes are not serious. HN can do without puerile generalization, and amateurs with a copy of the Quran and an idée fixe can conduct their exegesis elsewhere.
tptacek 11y ago
I'm troubled by it too. There is arguably some merit to exposing the latent bigotry of HN's users --- which, if it helps, is less about Islam specifically and more about Islam's utility in constructing facile arguments about the whole concept of religion --- but I think that merit is far outweighed by the enmity these threads generate. I think the mods should reconsider whether threads about religion are appropriate for HN. Lots of other totally legitimate discussions aren't legit on HN; for instance, I can talk your ear off about horse-race politics in the US, but am glad that the topic finds no purchase on HN. As long as there are threads about religion (or, worse, political Islam) on HN, the good-faith users of the site are going to be saddled with the task of trying to flag aggressively uncivil comments out of the threads. It's just too easy to score easy points by snarking about religion. It's hard to keep up, a giant waste of time, and I think pretty dispiriting for everyone involved.

by _nedR 11y ago

musha68k 11y ago

Thank you for your comment _nedR! I agree, the focus should be more on the potential perniciousness of unchecked religious fundamentalism in general (it doesn't matter if it's the KKK or ISIS) and middle-east history of the last 15-30 years in particular (why do some people fall for such simplistic, de-humanizing organizations)? ISIS is essentially a fascist movement and has as little to do with main-stream islamic values as the KKK has with christian ones. You might find this article on the "why" less simplistic: http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-interviewing-isis-prisoners/ http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-inte... I think putting time and effort into these kinds of political and religious discussions is very important as long as we keep a cool and open mind - love and understanding against potential fear and hate towards "others" so to speak. Peace! :)

dragontamer 11y ago

I agree it is loaded, but after the Paris attacks, people are scared. So I hope you can be understanding at this time. I went to school with Muslims during 9/11 (not many, but enough that I listened to them). I understand the frustration in your religion being singled out, misinterpreted and so forth.

planck01 11y ago

>Seems like the Muslims of 2015 are basically moving to the position of the Jews of 1915. Except that the Jews of 1915 were not blowing up, mas-murdering nor terrorizing people, nor were they waging war on non-Jews. Also, Jews were prosecuted throughout the world and eventually deported and/or killed, while Muslims are not in any way. Concluding, it is not alike in any way.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> Except that the Jews of 1915 were not blowing up, mas-murdering nor terrorizing people, nor were they waging war on non-Jews. Yeah, the rise in Zionist terrorism in Palestine was about 20 years after that.
- planck01 11y ago
  That is one similarity between Jews and Isis Muslims, they both claim a country based on their religious texts. I don't know what you try to frame as 'Zionist terrorism'. I am not a fan of many Israeli actions, but as far as I know there were no structural attempts of structurally terrorizing and brutalizing Palastinians by Israel that are in any way similar to what we see Isis doing today.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > I don't know what you try to frame as 'Zionist terrorism'. Acts of terrorism, including deliberate bombings, gunning down of civilians, etc., carried out by supporters of an independent Jewish state within what was then Mandatory Palestine by groups such as Irgun (a direct linear ancestor of the modern Likud Party.) > I am not a fan of many Israeli actions, but as far as I know there were no structural attempts of structurally terrorizing and brutalizing Palastinians by Israel Israel was largely built by people who engaged in terrorizing and brutalizing Palestinians in the name of the goal of creating the State of Israel. (To be fair, there was terrorism on both sides and organized terrorism on the Arab side against the Jewish side started first. But if we accept that targeting innocent civilians for terror is acceptable as long as someone did it to you first, well, most terrorist groups in history could point to someone who they saw as terrorizing the population they purport to represent first, and characterize their own terrorism as retribution against the group from which those attacks came, and supporters and sympathizers.)
_nedR 11y ago
>Except that the Jews of 1915 were not blowing up, mas-murdering nor terrorizing people, nor were they waging war on non-Jews. You are saying that if a small subset of Jews were blowing up, mass-murdering and terrorizing people (which they did during the zionist insurgency, and are also doing today), That means that would justify the persecution of the world's Jews and the general anti-semitic sentiment of the mainstream during that period?

dang 11y ago

In case it helps (I'm a moderator at HN), every user who is here in the spirit of intellectual curiosity belongs here. That includes our Muslim users as much as all others. We have a large, international community, so tolerance of differences is critical. It's ok to explore the specifics of the current situation if one does so civilly and substantively. But when someone attacks Islam per se, that is a religious flamewar and we tell them it is not allowed: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20religious%20flamewar https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=.... The goal is to avoid flamewars whose vitriol is exceeded only by tedium—the same thing we seek to avoid everywhere. Since Rumi is no less Islamic than ISIS, the discussions this excludes are not serious. HN can do without puerile generalization, and amateurs with a copy of the Quran and an idée fixe can conduct their exegesis elsewhere.

tptacek 11y ago

I'm troubled by it too. There is arguably some merit to exposing the latent bigotry of HN's users --- which, if it helps, is less about Islam specifically and more about Islam's utility in constructing facile arguments about the whole concept of religion --- but I think that merit is far outweighed by the enmity these threads generate. I think the mods should reconsider whether threads about religion are appropriate for HN. Lots of other totally legitimate discussions aren't legit on HN; for instance, I can talk your ear off about horse-race politics in the US, but am glad that the topic finds no purchase on HN. As long as there are threads about religion (or, worse, political Islam) on HN, the good-faith users of the site are going to be saddled with the task of trying to flag aggressively uncivil comments out of the threads. It's just too easy to score easy points by snarking about religion. It's hard to keep up, a giant waste of time, and I think pretty dispiriting for everyone involved.