19 ms·

Dawkins' main problem with your criticism of Christianity would probably be that it is too short... As other comments have noted, he has criticized Christianit

by berntb 14y ago

Dawkins' main problem with your criticism of Christianity would probably be that it is too short... As other comments have noted, he has criticized Christianity more than Islam. For a less well known counter example, this is from a not so extreme Muslim country (a few friends are from Bangladesh, so I read up a bit). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vested_Property_Act_%28Bangladesh%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vested_Property_Act_%28Banglade... >> It is officially estimated that about 75% of all Hindu lands in Bangladesh have been seized by using this act Edit: I have to ask -- why do left wing people have much less problems with the quite common Muslim antisemitism, than with Nazi antisemitism? Most of the arguments (except for the religious ones) and sources were copied from the nazis. It is even written in official(!) media in the Muslim world.

lutusp 14y ago
> why do left wing people have much less problems with the quite common Muslim antisemitism, than with Nazi antisemitism? I think you may be a bit confused. Muslims living in the Middle East aren't antiSemitic (unless they hate themselves). They may or may not be anti-Israeli, but it's a little simplistic to describe them as antiSemitic, since the're in large part Semitic themselves. Nazis were really antiSemitic in the classic sense (against Jews). This is a difficult label to apply to people who are racially nearly identical to the Semites in Israel. All I am saying is the problems of the Middle East don't fit into simple categories. > As other comments have noted, he has criticized Christianity more than Islam. Yes -- probably more to avoid what befell Salman Rushdie than any deeper goal.
- berntb 14y ago
  >>Muslims living in the Middle East aren't antiSemitic (unless they hate themselves). The word "antisemite" was created by an antisemite for just that specific meaning. See "gay" and other words that change their meaning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Etymology_and_usage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Etymology_and_usag... This discuss the prevalent antisemitism in the Arab world (check the rest of the Muslim world on Wikipedia yourself) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Arab_world http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Arab_world Edit: I have seen others dismiss racist hatred with an attempt at linguistics, but happily seldom on HN. Where do you guys pick up this kind of "argument"? Seriously, checking your links you're obviously smarter and more educated than most people I've ever met.
  - lutusp 14y ago
    > Edit: I have seen others dismiss racist hatred with an attempt at linguistics Why is that surprising? Racist hatred often arises from ignorance and confusion, and there's plenty of ignorance and confusion about the meaning of words. Examining word usage is an obvious starting point. > Where do you guys pick up this kind of "argument"? It's called fighting fire with fire. Racists tend to be ignorant of the group they hate, and they also tend to ignorant of the various meanings of words. And "antiSemite" is a classic example of a word that's tortured until it means anything.
    - berntb 14y ago
      I seriously expected you to say something like "Ah, I hadn't checked the dictionaries and repeated what I read in article X". I wanted to find out what X was. :-( >>Examining word usage is an obvious starting point. >>It's called fighting fire with fire So you are consciously lyi... redefining the dictionary and do logical jumps through hoops, to get out the opinion you consider "good". :-( >>Racists So, all means are OK that attacks the racist enemy in your own social group? Even trying to define away racism in other groups -- presumably so there won't be a negative view of them because of their racism? If that excusing of racism in your attacks on racism wasn't such pathetic Orwellian double-think, it would be funny. Anyway, thanks for the honesty -- if it really was honesty and not another trick. (My internal monologue right now is: "Grumble, must shower; I feel dirty when people sell out their intellectual integrity. Seriously, the left wing extremists are as crazy as the US right wing extremists.")
icebraining 14y ago
I have to ask -- why do left wing people have much less problems with the quite common Muslim antisemitism, than with Nazi antisemitism? Israel, and more specifically the Israel-Paletine conflict. The Left tend to side with the people they perceive as weak in a conflict, and while during Nazi rule they were persecuted and killed by the millions, they're now the more powerful side. Being close allies with the US doesn't help. This is, at least, what I see from knowing well a bunch of Southern European left-wing people, from social-democracts to communists.
- berntb 14y ago
  Are you really claiming that left wing idealists accept racist hate propaganda -- as long as it is from a billion of people that seems "weaker" than five millions of people? (I am not arguing, I have no better explanation for this craziness myself.)
  - lmm 14y ago
    The biggest problem with leftist thought is its tendency to degenerate into paternalism. It's easy to see the antisemitism of a largely poor, uneducated group as "not their own fault"; they're a product of their upbringing and environment. To criticize them for being antisemitic is as unfair and pointless as to criticize a savage for, well, savagery. Under this worldview, what these antisemitic poor people need is love, education and a chance to better themselves; give them this, and the antisemitism would probably wither away (except for a few truly bad individuals, who it would then be perfectly legitimate to criticize). By contrast the Nazis had no such excuse; the Germans were quite possibly the best-educated and most advanced nation in the world. Not to mention the way they put their antisemitism into practice. (speaking as a leftist myself)
    - icebraining 14y ago
      Yes, that seems about right.
    - berntb 14y ago
      Oh my god. :-) Off the top of my head... 1. As far as I can tell, this antisemitism thing is mainly from dictators that need an external enemy to hate. (A universal phenomenon in those countries -- and yes, using external enemies is not unique to dictators.) Just see how Iran motivates anything with attacks against Israel. The left wingers must KNOW what they are supporting! 2. Isn't it racism to accept so low standards for [mainly ethnic] groups and assume them to be unable to be responsible for their actions?! 3. This tolerance (of e.g. antisemitism) goes for Muslims living in Western Europe too, which hardly have these excuses. So it isn't coherent. 4. Why do the left accept the arguments and world view (re Israel), when they at the same time argues it comes from a bunch of illiterates that aren't responsible for their actions/opinions? 5. Should people with low education get lower punishments for crimes? Should they get no punishment if they can't read and don't understand the law? 6. Afaik, e.g. Iran has a quite large part educated of their population. [Also, that was a high culture thousands of years before my ancestors had writing.] Etc, etc, etc. (Still not arguing, fascinated. I have no clue what the Hell political believers on all sides are smoking -- I just want to live in a country without any of them.)

by berntb 14y ago

lutusp 14y ago

> why do left wing people have much less problems with the quite common Muslim antisemitism, than with Nazi antisemitism? I think you may be a bit confused. Muslims living in the Middle East aren't antiSemitic (unless they hate themselves). They may or may not be anti-Israeli, but it's a little simplistic to describe them as antiSemitic, since the're in large part Semitic themselves. Nazis were really antiSemitic in the classic sense (against Jews). This is a difficult label to apply to people who are racially nearly identical to the Semites in Israel. All I am saying is the problems of the Middle East don't fit into simple categories. > As other comments have noted, he has criticized Christianity more than Islam. Yes -- probably more to avoid what befell Salman Rushdie than any deeper goal.

berntb 14y ago
>>Muslims living in the Middle East aren't antiSemitic (unless they hate themselves). The word "antisemite" was created by an antisemite for just that specific meaning. See "gay" and other words that change their meaning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Etymology_and_usage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Etymology_and_usag... This discuss the prevalent antisemitism in the Arab world (check the rest of the Muslim world on Wikipedia yourself) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Arab_world http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Arab_world Edit: I have seen others dismiss racist hatred with an attempt at linguistics, but happily seldom on HN. Where do you guys pick up this kind of "argument"? Seriously, checking your links you're obviously smarter and more educated than most people I've ever met.
- lutusp 14y ago
  > Edit: I have seen others dismiss racist hatred with an attempt at linguistics Why is that surprising? Racist hatred often arises from ignorance and confusion, and there's plenty of ignorance and confusion about the meaning of words. Examining word usage is an obvious starting point. > Where do you guys pick up this kind of "argument"? It's called fighting fire with fire. Racists tend to be ignorant of the group they hate, and they also tend to ignorant of the various meanings of words. And "antiSemite" is a classic example of a word that's tortured until it means anything.
  - berntb 14y ago
    I seriously expected you to say something like "Ah, I hadn't checked the dictionaries and repeated what I read in article X". I wanted to find out what X was. :-( >>Examining word usage is an obvious starting point. >>It's called fighting fire with fire So you are consciously lyi... redefining the dictionary and do logical jumps through hoops, to get out the opinion you consider "good". :-( >>Racists So, all means are OK that attacks the racist enemy in your own social group? Even trying to define away racism in other groups -- presumably so there won't be a negative view of them because of their racism? If that excusing of racism in your attacks on racism wasn't such pathetic Orwellian double-think, it would be funny. Anyway, thanks for the honesty -- if it really was honesty and not another trick. (My internal monologue right now is: "Grumble, must shower; I feel dirty when people sell out their intellectual integrity. Seriously, the left wing extremists are as crazy as the US right wing extremists.")

icebraining 14y ago

I have to ask -- why do left wing people have much less problems with the quite common Muslim antisemitism, than with Nazi antisemitism? Israel, and more specifically the Israel-Paletine conflict. The Left tend to side with the people they perceive as weak in a conflict, and while during Nazi rule they were persecuted and killed by the millions, they're now the more powerful side. Being close allies with the US doesn't help. This is, at least, what I see from knowing well a bunch of Southern European left-wing people, from social-democracts to communists.

berntb 14y ago
Are you really claiming that left wing idealists accept racist hate propaganda -- as long as it is from a billion of people that seems "weaker" than five millions of people? (I am not arguing, I have no better explanation for this craziness myself.)
- lmm 14y ago
  The biggest problem with leftist thought is its tendency to degenerate into paternalism. It's easy to see the antisemitism of a largely poor, uneducated group as "not their own fault"; they're a product of their upbringing and environment. To criticize them for being antisemitic is as unfair and pointless as to criticize a savage for, well, savagery. Under this worldview, what these antisemitic poor people need is love, education and a chance to better themselves; give them this, and the antisemitism would probably wither away (except for a few truly bad individuals, who it would then be perfectly legitimate to criticize). By contrast the Nazis had no such excuse; the Germans were quite possibly the best-educated and most advanced nation in the world. Not to mention the way they put their antisemitism into practice. (speaking as a leftist myself)
  - icebraining 14y ago
    Yes, that seems about right.
  - berntb 14y ago
    Oh my god. :-) Off the top of my head... 1. As far as I can tell, this antisemitism thing is mainly from dictators that need an external enemy to hate. (A universal phenomenon in those countries -- and yes, using external enemies is not unique to dictators.) Just see how Iran motivates anything with attacks against Israel. The left wingers must KNOW what they are supporting! 2. Isn't it racism to accept so low standards for [mainly ethnic] groups and assume them to be unable to be responsible for their actions?! 3. This tolerance (of e.g. antisemitism) goes for Muslims living in Western Europe too, which hardly have these excuses. So it isn't coherent. 4. Why do the left accept the arguments and world view (re Israel), when they at the same time argues it comes from a bunch of illiterates that aren't responsible for their actions/opinions? 5. Should people with low education get lower punishments for crimes? Should they get no punishment if they can't read and don't understand the law? 6. Afaik, e.g. Iran has a quite large part educated of their population. [Also, that was a high culture thousands of years before my ancestors had writing.] Etc, etc, etc. (Still not arguing, fascinated. I have no clue what the Hell political believers on all sides are smoking -- I just want to live in a country without any of them.)