Progressive Apologism for Islam: why?

The BBQ Pit
1

Why are so many progressives apologists for Islam and obfuscate when people mention the problems that arise in the present day because of Islam and the radicalism which emanates from it as a motivation?

Is it because they think doing so will make Americans less likely to go to war, even if it means letting terrorists attack?

Is it because its easy to buy into the idea that the history of the world is the white north oppressing the “brown” south?

Is it because they think Islamic radicalism wouldn’t exist but for the Jewish State of Israel?

Is it because since GWB launched a war on terror, the want to see the world opposite him?

I ask because Islamic societies on the whole are far more draconian and socially conservative than the most RW nutties here in the US.

This stuff really makes “progressives” look like a joke; I used to be one back in the 2000s, but can’t call myself one anymore, largely over this, and their hatred of Israel, which I suspect colours their views on Islamic radicalism.

2

How about “Because Progressives find broad-brushing an entire religion (of over a billion followers) over the actions of a relative handful of extremists very distasteful and way too reminiscent of past historical situations that turned out really, really badly”?

With just a touch of “‘Western’ religions ain’t so hot about this stuff either, if you look at their Holy Scriptures”…

3

It’s because they hate America. Obviously.

4

Progressives “paint with a broad brush” all the time about Christians; yet when its done against Muslims, they get all pissy.

Also, in reply to your second quote, while yes, other religions have brutal texts, the incidence of terror attacks in the name/cause of Christianity and Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism are far less than the incidents of terror attacks in the name of Islam. Governments around the globe spend billions to fight the latter, not the former.

5

Be specific. Give Examples.

6

How about “you’re an Islamophobic asshole who never misses an opportunity to inject anti-Islamic hate into every possible conversation whether it’s relevant or not, and if there aren’t enough conversations going on for you to sufficiently vent your hate, then you have to start a whole new one in the Pit”? How about that?

If this is about the events in Nice, the vermin who caused this was not a religious follower, he was a scumbag criminal with about as much regard for religion as a sewer rat. He also was having mental and marital troubles. Just like you, he appeared to be hate-filled and mentally unbalanced, although, to his credit, at least he probably didn’t constantly claim to be “progressive”. Perhaps you should learn to hate yourself, too, and ban yourself from civilized countries. I’d support that, especially if you banned yourself to countries that didn’t have Internet.

7

umm he yelled Allahu Akbar during the attack, therefore, its Islamic terrorism.

8

I think you’re looking for the term “regressive left,” which you can find many hits of on Google.

As much as I can summarize it, I think the sentiment goes like this:

Islam presents many liberals with a tough choice. Islam is seen as an “outsider/minority religion” (unlike Christianity, which is seen as America’s “home religion”, the “majority” religion) and therefore it should be treated with a certain reverence or protection. It’s not just Islam - the same applies to Shintoism, Buddhists, Hinduism, etc.

Now why is it a tough choice? Because Islam - in many ways even more so than Christianity - has many associations of being anti-gay, anti-women’s rights, of being oppressive, etc. So this puts many liberals in a quandary.

Oppose Islam, and you are being a cultural supremacist - and you are not being tolerant of, or respectful of, a minority outsider religion. Support Islam, though, and you may directly or indirectly be helping to squelch women’s rights and gays, etc. (I should add the necessary caveats of “Not all,” “some,” “Many,” etc. here.) There are, of course, some liberals who try to walk the tightrope by supporting Islam *and *simultaneously supporting women’s rights and gays, but it’s a mighty narrow tightrope to walk.

Oftentimes, Islam has won the “tiebreaker”, so to speak. When the Cologne attacks on women took place, it was a noticeably awkward incident for some liberals, because many of the attackers were Muslim refugees from the Middle East. You have to defend women’s rights, but how do you do so without indirectly promoting xenophobia?
I think Bill Maher (or someone) said it best: Why do we treat Muslims like they are a protected species?

9

There’s a certain liberal behavior - and I would like to know if there is a specific term for it. For lack of a better term, I’ll call it “leveling.”
Specifically, if a group is considered privileged, majority, or advantaged, then it is OK to make jokes at the expense of it, or stereotype it with a broad brush. But if a group is considered disadvantaged, oppressed or minority, then it is wrong to make jokes at the expense of it, or to stereotype it with a broad brush.
This is why many liberals will be visibly uncomfortable at broad-brush stereotyping or jokes that are made at the expense of gays, racial minorities, women, and Muslims, etc., but are more comfortable - or at least less offended - at the same thing being done to heterosexuals, white people, men, or Christians.

10

And that means every Muslim is guilty of terrorism?

You know that’s racism, right?

And liberals have staked out the controversial position that racism is bad.

11

Are you serious?

Bwahahahahaha, that is the most moronic thing I’ve heard today. :smiley:

12

This is total nonsense. It also misses the hateful point being made by the OP.

This is not about “jokes” but about specific discriminatory policies that are being proposed or social attitudes that are being advanced to discriminate against people based on their religion or ethnicity. It’s about vile discrimination and the abrogation of human rights, not jokes. End of story. The OP is a hateful, far-right regressive idiot and vulgar bigot.

13

I think it’s commonly called “punching down vs punching up”.

14

When I did say ever Muslim was guilty of terror? I do argue if one engages in mass murder while shouting Allahu Akbar, that’s the definition of Islamic terrorism.

Also, there you liberals go again making Islam into a race so u can frame it in terms of skin color. Islam is not a race or ethnicity!! What’s next: when people criticize Christianity, the retort be “you hate white people?”

15

Are you people nuts?

Of course when someone yells “Allahu Akbar” prior to committing a terrorist attack it’s Islamic terrorism.

16

I think the key words are, “during the attack.”

If someone shouts “Hail Buddhism,” that’s one thing.
If someone shouts “Hail Buddhism” while gunning down a crowd with an assault rifle, that’s another thing.

17

No, Islam is a religion.

Xenophobia can be the fear or hatred towards any group of people. While there’s a truth to several points in this thread, the fact is that Xenophobes, both in the right and in the left, will want to paint any group of people with a broad brush, while non-xenophobes will want to treat every person individually, regardless of gender, religion, culture, etc.

So I don’t see it as a liberal / conservative issue.

18

The use of “xenophobia” usually connotates moral terpitude. “Phobia” relates to “an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation”; and in this case being certain groups, hence the “xeno.”

Criticizing Islam or having doubts about Muslim immigration for the right reasons (my top reason is a large portion of the Muslim populations’ attitude about society and the world, and fear of terrorist evil jihad. skin color is not one of them, nor is it one of mine) is not morally wrong.

Liberals make fun of Mormons and evangelicals all the time. Are they now all xenophobes?

19

Yes, and the idea that a billion people worldwide are all, or even a majority, enemies of the West — enough to restrict their civil rights, their ability to travel to our country, and bomb the hell out of their countries — IS illogical. So there you go.

Maybe, if liberals also advocated policies to punish Mormons and evangelicals both domestically and overseas, and had the power to do so. (And yes, I know some actually think they do, but I have similar opinions about that point of view.)

20

Wait a minute, you lying duplicitous piece of shit, I thought you kept telling us you were a liberal. You know, like this sort of fucking bullshit you kept posting:
I’m a white guy on the left of the center, a Bill Clinton type Democrat.

Maybe try to go with honesty now, you lying douchebag troll. Here’s a suggested good start: “I’m a brain-dead dumbass far-right bigot who listens to too much late-night talk radio”.