ten years of Afghanistan's war and the Left

Avatar image for paracelsus
Paracelsus

2361

Forum Posts

342

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Paracelsus

Last week saw the tenth anniversary of the Afghan war. Although I admit that there have been many mistakes by the Anglo-American coalition, one thing that I am troubled with is the implicit(if not explicit) support for the Taliban by sections of the far Left, either ignoring or downplaying its decidedly reactionary stance on women's rights and Church(or should I say mosque?)/State relations as well as gays(shades of the Stalinist trope that homosexuality was a"bourgeious perversion" a la Cuba), presumably on the grounds that anybody who for whatever reason opposes the West politically or militarily was de facto"progressive".

Anyone who drew attention to this, in questioning calls for an immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan by Western forces( which would almost certainly lead to the Taliban's return to power, with all that implies for Afghanistan's girls and women, gays, and freethinkers of both sexes), is preumably denounced as an "Islamophobe" and loftily told that "we must impose our ideas of gender equality on a society that does not wish it" or the trope so old that it can apply for its own Freedom Pass and Social Security benefits"- "it would be racist/ imperialist/Islamophobic to judge the Taliban by our standards- it's their culture!"

Well, first of all, this argument that we must "respect" the Taliban's illiberal views on gender or gays is BALONEY( to use the politest phrase available in a family site like this). If we were to take a time machine and arrive in either: pre-Civil War or Jim Crow Deep South of the US( ie during slavery or segregation), Stalin's Soviet Union or apartheid era South Africa, would those who argue that we should "respect" the views of a bunch of people who if they were evangelical Protestants,, traditionalist( ie opposed to the reforms of Vatican Council II, pace Mel Gibson and his father Hutton) Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Church, would be correctly excoriated as the very model of reaction in its most literal sense as would anybody who blithely claimed, we must "respect" the culture of slaveowners/segregationists, Stalinists or apartheid minded Afrikaners(much of the demands by an odd couple of otherwise decidedly secular- at least when it came to other faiths such as Roman Catholicism- "trendy lefties" and their new BFFs in "Islamists" that we should "respect"( ie not print or say anything critical of

Islam in theory or practice) stems from this decidedly ludicrous assertion. My response is that if you want sacred cows, then emigrate to the Indian subcontinent!

Secondly, the red herring of "culture"( I'm beginning to see why Hermann Goering once quipped that"whenever I hear the word "culture", I reach for my revolver!"). Culture is ( or in its healthy state) NOT meant to be some kind of static entity, unchanging and unchangeable ( what I call the "jam jar" concept of culture, preserved in aspic or formadelhyde). Western societies once included such practices as slavery/segregation, the burning of alleged witches, fox hunting, bear/badger baiting

and the beating of wives by husbands, provided of course the impliment was no thicker than a husband's thumb( hence the phrase "rule of thumb) proscription of homosexuality and the death penalty( the last execution took place in 1964 on the mainland UK, a year before the abolition of capital punishment)), ALL of these defended in their time as "cultural", but all ultimately deemed to be out of keeping with the mores of a civilized society. How ironic that the Left(and its "jihadist" allies) should stoop to using an argument already discredited by the Right.

Last week, the Principlaity of Lichtenstein defeated by a narrow margin attempts to liberalize abortion laws(the Principality is of course largely Roman Catholic so this is hardly surprising). Leftists and liberals would argue that these laws should be liberalized anyway(irrespective of the religious views and beliefs of many Lichtensteiners, or Poles and Nicaraguans, who have faced and-correctly in my view-rejected demands from Amnesty International or Planned Parenthood that they amend their laws on this issue as they reflect the spiritual beliefs of a vast majority of its citizens), but when it comes to Islam, the "roaring lion of Western secularism" becomes what the Victorians termed aptly a"wee, timorious beastie", forever tugging its forelock!

Avatar image for progenitorigin
progenitorigin

7575

Forum Posts

663

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#1  Edited By progenitorigin

GTFO. 
 
Avatar image for _zombie_
_Zombie_

10572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#2  Edited By _Zombie_

@progenitor said:

GTFO.

Seriously, this entire post just seemed aimed at bashing Islam and the people who worship it. Basically, the way I read it, the OP is all for Gay civil rights and whatnot, but we should hate the Muslims because they don't agree? Isn't that exactly what most organized religions do? Berate and persecute the dissenters? So isn't this just a tad hypocritical?

Avatar image for paracelsus
Paracelsus

2361

Forum Posts

342

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Paracelsus

The phrase"bashing Islam" in your reply sums up the hypocritical double standard I alluded to in my original post. Christians(and more specifically Catholics, my own denomination) are expected to "grin and bear it" when something like "The Da Vinci Code" comes out from Hollywood, but when an obscure Danish paper carries cartoons allegedly "blasphemous" to Muslims and when they threaten violence, we are told that we must "respect their feelings" and be "culturally sensitive"( I suppose the phrase "politically correct " is out of style).

As far as I'm concerned, the double standard is rooted in quite literally cowardice- critics of the Church of Rome can be damned SURE that no one will come after them, whereas(pace Theo Van Gogh, stabbed to death by an outraged Islamist a few years back) can't be so certain!

One thing I hate with a purple passion and I have never hidden is hypocrisy, cant and intellectual and moral dishonesty-and much of the media's attitude to the differing faiths is rooted in all four!

Terry

Avatar image for progenitorigin
progenitorigin

7575

Forum Posts

663

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#4  Edited By progenitorigin
@Paracelsus said:

The phrase"bashing Islam" in your reply sums up the hypocritical double standard I alluded to in my original post. Christians(and more specifically Catholics, my own denomination) are expected to "grin and bear it" when something like "The Da Vinci Code" comes out from Hollywood, but when an obscure Danish paper carries cartoons allegedly "blasphemous" to Muslims and when they threaten violence, we are told that we must "respect their feelings" and be "culturally sensitive"( I suppose the phrase "politically correct " is out of style).

As far as I'm concerned, the double standard is rooted in quite literally cowardice- critics of the Church of Rome can be damned SURE that no one will come after them, whereas(pace Theo Van Gogh, stabbed to death by an outraged Islamist a few years back) can't be so certain!

One thing I hate with a purple passion and I have never hidden is hypocrisy, cant and intellectual and moral dishonesty-and much of the media's attitude to the differing faiths is rooted in all four!

Terry


Ever hear of the cultural phrase "be the bigger man."? 
Avatar image for jeanlucpicard
jeanlucpicard

1902

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By jeanlucpicard

I'm very lazy so i didn't read it. anyone wanna sumerize it in 1 sentance? ( my grammar rocks dont it?)
Avatar image for weaponmaster
weaponmaster

1415

Forum Posts

26

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By weaponmaster

Here we go. Another derisive, divisive, us against them, separatist, proselytizing, diatribe.

It's 2011. It's time to start finding commonalities in our fellow human beings instead of perpetuating this type of rhetoric that divides us and these labels that polarize us.

It is how those in power stay in power. They pit us against each other and they reap the benefits.

Avatar image for dernman
dernman

36151

Forum Posts

10092

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

#7  Edited By dernman

You will never come together when one side will never acknowledge the other might have a point even if they don't agree with it.

Avatar image for thejeffhimself
TheJeffHimself

239

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By TheJeffHimself

Somewhere in the world...there is a bridge missing it's troll.

Avatar image for _zombie_
_Zombie_

10572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#10  Edited By _Zombie_
@Paracelsus said:

The phrase"bashing Islam" in your reply sums up the hypocritical double standard I alluded to in my original post. Christians(and more specifically Catholics, my own denomination) are expected to "grin and bear it" when something like "The Da Vinci Code" comes out from Hollywood, but when an obscure Danish paper carries cartoons allegedly "blasphemous" to Muslims and when they threaten violence, we are told that we must "respect their feelings" and be "culturally sensitive"( I suppose the phrase "politically correct " is out of style).

As far as I'm concerned, the double standard is rooted in quite literally cowardice- critics of the Church of Rome can be damned SURE that no one will come after them, whereas(pace Theo Van Gogh, stabbed to death by an outraged Islamist a few years back) can't be so certain!

One thing I hate with a purple passion and I have never hidden is hypocrisy, cant and intellectual and moral dishonesty-and much of the media's attitude to the differing faiths is rooted in all four!

Terry


Not saying that Christianity is innocent of it, but the post makes it seem like you're bashing it, not making a commentary on how the media is supposed to tolerate it and whatnot.  Plus, the Taliban hardly represent the majority of Islam.  I get your point now, but it was very hard to see that based off of your original post.  I myself don't agree with Islam, but I think it's very much their choice.  So I'm sorry if my post offended you, but yours was a bit confusing to read, so I took it wrong.  So now that I actually understand your point better, I agree.  The political correctness of today's media is annoyingly stupid, because even if they do all pretend to agree, it's just that.. pretending.  We can never be truly unified if we're all just feighning agreement with everyone else.