European Politics
- Thread starter Forostar
- Start date
The German police are saying no links to terrorism, so if this was a radicalized youth, he was self-radicalized - like the Nice attacker, like the Orlando attacker, like the Ottawa attacker.
Welcome to the new normal.
Welcome to the new normal.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
Not only is it not related to terrorist groups, looks like this doesn't even have anything to do with radical Islamism. It likely has to do with the exact opposite, a retaliation influenced by a mental problem after being target of xenophobia.
The attacker was heard shouting "I am German" after being target of anti-Turkish abuse, apparently. -Though he's from Iranian origin-
The attacker was heard shouting "I am German" after being target of anti-Turkish abuse, apparently. -Though he's from Iranian origin-
Wait, people don't like being targetted by xenophobia? no way!
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
Far too often people who criticise politicans for their handling of radical Islamism miss out on how big of a threat xenophobia is. And vice versa.
They're both significant threats that need to be dealt with. The rightful stance against radical Islamism at times turns into xenophobic rhetoric, which hurts the cause in search for a solution more than it helps it. Because lumping non-radical people from Muslim majority countries together with the radicals defeats the purpose, you're alienating the people you should be supporting.
They're both significant threats that need to be dealt with. The rightful stance against radical Islamism at times turns into xenophobic rhetoric, which hurts the cause in search for a solution more than it helps it. Because lumping non-radical people from Muslim majority countries together with the radicals defeats the purpose, you're alienating the people you should be supporting.
RTC
Libera et impera!
I can see that argument, but remember that a lot of people's criticism is not of Muslims themselves, but rather, of the Islamic doctrine.
We aren't criticising them because they are people of colour. That is obviously racist. We are criticising them because their ideological doctrine is so contradictory, that any conclusion can be made, and given the pedestal that religion holds for many people, this makes people more likely to attempt to justify these crimes with it. And I know there are plenty of normal, good-natured Muslims in the world, but here's the thing: If you take Islam out of the equation, these people would still be normal, good-natured people because they have the ability to separate moral right from wrong. We'd still have nutjobs, but nutjobs need to justify to themselves why they are committing atrocities; it's very rare that they do it for the sake of doing it.
We aren't criticising them because they are people of colour. That is obviously racist. We are criticising them because their ideological doctrine is so contradictory, that any conclusion can be made, and given the pedestal that religion holds for many people, this makes people more likely to attempt to justify these crimes with it. And I know there are plenty of normal, good-natured Muslims in the world, but here's the thing: If you take Islam out of the equation, these people would still be normal, good-natured people because they have the ability to separate moral right from wrong. We'd still have nutjobs, but nutjobs need to justify to themselves why they are committing atrocities; it's very rare that they do it for the sake of doing it.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
"We" is a very broad term here. You do that, I do that -I assume you remember my opinion on Islam's influence on Europe-. But not everyone does. The amount of xenophobes who camouflage themselves between the non-racist people who are just concerned about it all like us is not small.
If you're looking at every Middle Easterner you see as a potential terrorist and asking them to leave your country, then something's very wrong there. And it's very counterproductive. The problems that need to be taken care of systematically and in a broad range shouldn't ruin a normal, law-abiding immigrant's life.
Nutjobs are very good at figuring out reasons to be violent.
Yet another reason why anti-immigration politics makes us all much less safe.
RTC
Libera et impera!
Not all nutjobs resort to violence. In fact, it's probably a minority. But of the ones that commit terrorist attacks, the majority of which are Islamic, because their documentation says it's OK. As I said before, it's easy to write off people as nutjobs, but the motivation is extremely important in order to understand why they did what they did.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
Here's my take on what should be done about Middle Eastern immigration:
- Limited immigration with strict controls. Strong background checks. This act is often called inherently racist and prejudiced by the regressives but it's a very justified method in the current state of things. Pretending "every region in the world is awesome" is fun, but it's just not true. Take it from a Middle Easterner.
- A stronger approach to integration. Don't allow the immigrants to form their own worlds inside a foreign country. Don't let a city in England have more mosques than it does churches, don't let them become "no-go zones". But don't be hypocritical and push them out to the ghettos only to cry after it blows up in your face. *cough* France *cough*
- Stop putting people (whomever they might be) on a pedestal or keep them in a bubble. Protect people's rights to criticise them. Action is what ends discrimination and inequality. Not limiting speech. -I think this recent point is especially evident with the Civil Rights Movement and the LGBT Rights Movement, action led to more acceptance, limiting speech led to more disdain-
- Support the secularists in Muslim majority countries. "Muslim" does not inherently mean "anti-secularist". The amount of secular Muslims here in my country nearly equals the non-secular Muslims. And while they may be rarer, they do exist in countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Try your best at cutting economic ties to state sponsors of Islamic terrorism. (I do understand that a certain thing called oil makes it pretty difficult)
- Limited immigration with strict controls. Strong background checks. This act is often called inherently racist and prejudiced by the regressives but it's a very justified method in the current state of things. Pretending "every region in the world is awesome" is fun, but it's just not true. Take it from a Middle Easterner.
- A stronger approach to integration. Don't allow the immigrants to form their own worlds inside a foreign country. Don't let a city in England have more mosques than it does churches, don't let them become "no-go zones". But don't be hypocritical and push them out to the ghettos only to cry after it blows up in your face. *cough* France *cough*
- Stop putting people (whomever they might be) on a pedestal or keep them in a bubble. Protect people's rights to criticise them. Action is what ends discrimination and inequality. Not limiting speech. -I think this recent point is especially evident with the Civil Rights Movement and the LGBT Rights Movement, action led to more acceptance, limiting speech led to more disdain-
- Support the secularists in Muslim majority countries. "Muslim" does not inherently mean "anti-secularist". The amount of secular Muslims here in my country nearly equals the non-secular Muslims. And while they may be rarer, they do exist in countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Try your best at cutting economic ties to state sponsors of Islamic terrorism. (I do understand that a certain thing called oil makes it pretty difficult)
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
I'd like to add this:
The reason between why Christians nowadays are more cultural Christians than they are hardcore Christians while the Muslims tend to radicalize more is education. Christian doctrine is also very open to radicalize and use as a motivation for terrorism. And it has happened in the past. The problem that needs to be taken care of is the lack of education and freedom in Muslim countries, not their religion itself. Christendom distanced itself from the influence of the Church, and that's what they thrived. They made religion irrelevant with their education and valuation of science. Christianity didn't disappear, but it stopped getting in the way of human progress. Same should happen in the Middle East.
Even if religion disappeared, the lack of education and the problems these Middle Eastern countries have would lead them to find something else to be violent about. Probably nationalism. They wouldn't be suicide bombers because there'd be no martyrdom, but they'd still harm people.
RTC
Libera et impera!
Education is definitely a factor, but I think key individuals like Thomas Aquinas, as well as events such as the Thirty Years War helped significantly also.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
Figures like that used to exist in Islam, too. Rumi, Haji Bektaş Veli, Yunus Emre among others. The Islamic Golden Age didn't happen for no reason, they supported humanism, progressivism and valued science greatly.
What's happening is that Muslim world is living its Dark Ages at the moment. Christendom went through its period of violence, ignorance and bigotry itself, then broke out of it. What needs to be done is to help Middle East usher in their own age of enlightenment.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
Radicalization is not a seperate entity from Islamism. They're the same thing. Reasons for radicalization are usually lack of education, poverty or a sense of vengeance. But it doesn't make them not "not Islamic". And to be honest, refraining from recognizing that Islamists are a huge part of the Muslim world hurts the Muslim world more than any part of the world. Because the Muslim world needs to recognize it as such and fight against them.
It's a very popular argument to say that radical Muslim terrorists are not "real Muslims". But they are Muslims. They hurt their fellow Muslims and ruin the perception of Muslim countries on earth. And that's why secular Muslims need to recognize the threat amongst themselves and fight back.
Last edited:
I disagree. Radicalization isn't necessarily Islamic in nature. There are radical anti-government terrorists, such as the man who attacked a mosque in the US a few years ago, or the sovereign citizens who occupied a US nature preserve earlier this year. Some radicalization is absolutely Islamic, of course, in theme.
Yes, I agree with this statement. Anyone who says that Muslim terrorists aren't Muslim is silly.
RTC
Libera et impera!
I seem to remember a figure (forgotten the name) who emerged at the same time as Aquinas, who preached the same things as Aquinas with regards to Islam. He ended up being executed for heresy.
The Islamic Golden Age was great for the time, but we need to remember that in comparison, Christianity was in its dark age. It's not as if Islam went down-hill per-say (OK, it did with the expansion of the Ottomans after the Abbasid empire, but that's more of a criticism of the Ottomans than anything else), more that it really failed to progress from its golden age, and became outdated, and retrograde.
Which most likely needs to be the removal of theocratic states as you suggested, and potentially Islamic reform, which whilst optimistic, is still on the table.
@LC: 97% of global terrorism has Islamic roots. Yeah, this is accounting for much more unstable countries than the US and Canada, but the analogy still stands that this is very much an issue linked to Islam.
Last edited:
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
Oh that's what you meant? Well then of course radicalization isn't just Islamic.
It did go downhill, actually. Right after the Golden Age, newly elected leaders supported Islamic doctrines that denounced the scientific progress and pushed a more theology based approach to education.
Ever heard of Al-Ghazali? He was an incredibly influential Muslim theologian. He pushed the "eye of the heart" concept, meaning a Muslim could see the truth without putting anything to do the test and merely by the virtue of his faith. His influence, I think, was quite detrimental to Islamic perception of science and education.
I assume you meant to write non-secular here.
Last edited: