Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the mosques...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#1  Postby Animavore » Apr 25, 2016 12:16 pm

Ayaan Hirsi Ali can recount in virtual slow motion the events of November 2, 2004—the day Theo Van Gogh, her collaborator on a film about abuse of women in certain Muslim societies, was assassinated. The Somali-born women’s rights advocate and writer, then a member of the Dutch Parliament, had herself received innumerable death threats for writing the film, entitled Submission. The Dutch Minister of Interior informed her of what had occurred: Mr. Van Gogh was shot eight times and left on an Amsterdam street with his throat slit and a large knife stuck in his chest. The killer used a second knife to attach a note to Mr. Van Gogh’s chest, warning of violence to Western nations and to Jews, and pronouncing a death sentence against Ms. Hirsi Ali.

The death sentence began this way: “In the name of Allah most gracious, most merciful,” and went on to proclaim that “all enemies of Islam will be destroyed.”

With an estimated 140 million girls and women throughout the world subjected to genital mutilation, with thousands murdered each year in so-called “honor killings” and untold millions forced to marry against their will, one would suppose that Ms. Hirsi Ali—the world’s preeminent critic of these practices and advocate on behalf of their victims—would be universally hailed by those who style themselves as progressives. Since Ms. Hirsi Ali’s advocacy for women has meant that she has lived under death threats for over a decade, one would be the more justified in imagining that she would be regarded as a hero by progressives everywhere. But despite a body of work as a parliamentarian, a writer and as head of a foundation that is devoted to the protection of women and has earned her recognition by TIME Magazine as one of the 100 most important people on the planet, Ms. Hirsi Ali finds herself the object of vitriol by some on the left, who cannot bear her for this reason: She is critical of Islam and what she sees in the Muslim world as not only an indulgence in violence but a practice of justifying it. Ms. Hirsi Ali says unapologetically that in Islam there exists a “culture of misogyny [that] needs to be addressed quickly and frankly, and we must not censor ourselves.”

But as Ms. Hirsi Ali works to combat those challenges, she finds herself battling the stubborn, unrelenting forces that would have her censored. The efforts to tar her with the tried-and-true epithet of “Islamophobic” come both from powerful Muslim enterprises that would like to squash her like a bug and some on the left, for whom a narrative of the Muslim world as victims and the West as victimizers is precious and comfortable. They regard Ms. Hirsi Ali as trouble. She is, after all, a Muslim-born woman who personally experienced the very abuse that she criticizes. The 46-year-old is also a superb writer, a winning speaker, inarguably courageous and telegenic to boot. She is an atheist as well. For those who wish to suppress criticism of the plight of women under Islam, she is, in short, a disaster.

Ms. Hirsi Ali warns against use of the words “extreme” and “radical” to describe as peripheral an ideology which, she argues, is in fact quite prevalent in Muslim communities around the globe, and which leads easily to violence—whether in the form of female genital mutilation or honor killings or wife-beating or suicide bombings. She views the reliance on those words as self-delusion, a soothing, self-administered palliative whose effect is to mask evidence that violence is the largely natural extension of fundamentalist values sternly dictated and widely embraced in Muslim communities—values that encourage harsh treatment of women and strict, even brutal, punishment of non-believers. Her warnings, and those of others who risk their reputations and lives to criticize Islamic institutions, are distinctly unwelcome in many Western quarters, where they are regarded as grievously politically incorrect, and where the “few-bad-apples” narrative of Islamic extremism is vastly preferred.

Full article. http://observer.com/2016/04/why-ayaan-h ... -liberals/
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 43202
Age: 41
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#2  Postby chairman bill » Apr 25, 2016 12:35 pm

Yep. Collective Western guilt over colonialist pasts and racism, leads some to the idiotic conclusion that the enemy of my enemy (fundamentalist Islam vs. right-wing conservative Western establishment) must be my friend, failing to recognise that fundamentalist Islam will behead the Western liberals, just the same as those right-wing conservatives.
Socialists: winning the fight against people-hating fascists of the right & (alleged) centre.
User avatar
chairman bill
RS Donator
 
Posts: 28091
Male

Country: UK: fucked since 2010
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#3  Postby laklak » Apr 25, 2016 2:27 pm

There is a subset of modern 'liberals' who just fucking LOVE to be offended. They'll pick anything and run with it. My response is usually to double down on whatever they're enraged about, they're so cute when the get all purpley faced and start spitting. Besides, what they gonna do about it? I'm the one with the guns.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19799
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#4  Postby crank » Apr 25, 2016 3:16 pm

I get so disgusted by this issue. You have both sides getting so vitriolic when they are in essence on the same side, for the most part. It's possible to be adamantly against fundamentalist, extremist Islam, while still not wanting to paint all muslims with that brush. And to also recognize the rise of all of the extremist Islamic forces is the result of the West's meddling in the region. It isn't hard to show how this rise pretty closely follows the rise of the meddling. Nor is it hard to show the Saudis have aided in fomenting the extremism, or that the US was right in there with them. We'll get to see some really juicy info about it if they declassify the redacted pages of the 9/11 report. To point at Islam as the root cause of the violence is not only wrong, it is unhelpful. For one thing, it impedes any progress in woman's rights, which have steadily improved in the developing world, especially after women have been allowed education. Giving them an enemy to point to that appears to be waging jihad against muslims, an idea Bush so intelligently helped immensely with his idiotic natterings, only serves to harden their religious affiliations.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
-George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
User avatar
crank
RS Donator
 
Name: Sick & Tired
Posts: 10362
Age: 4
Male

Country: 2nd miasma on the left
Pitcairn (pn)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#5  Postby scott1328 » Apr 25, 2016 7:10 pm

laklak wrote:There is a subset of modern 'liberals' who just fucking LOVE to be offended. They'll pick anything and run with it. My response is usually to double down on whatever they're enraged about, they're so cute when the get all purpley faced and start spitting. Besides, what they gonna do about it? I'm the one with the guns.

Twitter block-bot.
User avatar
scott1328
 
Name: Some call me... Tim
Posts: 8573
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#6  Postby Arjan Dirkse » Apr 30, 2016 8:18 pm

crank wrote:And to also recognize the rise of all of the extremist Islamic forces is the result of the West's meddling in the region.


Seriously? Islamic extremism predates the founding of the United States, and Western meddling...Islam was "extremist" right from the start. It has had periods when there were more enlightened leaders, but extremism in Islam goes right back to the beginning.
Arjan Dirkse
 
Posts: 1743
Male

European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#7  Postby surreptitious57 » Apr 30, 2016 8:50 pm

She knows far more about Islam than Western liberals since she used to be a Muslim. Though that aside
they may still be reluctant to criticise it for fear of being labelled racist whereas she can do so without
being labelled one. Both of these reasons may be while she angers them. The first is justifiable but the
second not so because legitimate criticism of Islam does not equate to racism under any circumstances
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 10074

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#8  Postby Matthew Shute » May 01, 2016 12:04 am

At considerable risk to herself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali actually stands up and speaks up for liberal values, in direct opposition to theocrats and regressive religious dogmas, unlike the smug pseudo-liberal imbeciles who want to call her an "Islamophobe" for doing so.
"Change will preserve us. It is the lifeblood of the Isles. It will move mountains! It will mount movements!" - Sheogorath
User avatar
Matthew Shute
 
Name: Matthew Shute
Posts: 3676
Age: 41

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#9  Postby crank » May 01, 2016 12:21 am

Arjan Dirkse wrote:
crank wrote:And to also recognize the rise of all of the extremist Islamic forces is the result of the West's meddling in the region.


Seriously? Islamic extremism predates the founding of the United States, and Western meddling...Islam was "extremist" right from the start. It has had periods when there were more enlightened leaders, but extremism in Islam goes right back to the beginning.

Seriously? We're going all the way back to Muhammad? Then why not go after Dark-Age Christianity when the Muslim wold was flourished in culture and science?

That the west is the source is well known and understood. It's been established in numerous ways, even the Defence Dept. published a report back in 2004 saying this, ordered by Rumsfeld no less. I've linked to it in at least 2 previous threads I'm pretty sure, but I'll do so again in case anyone else is ignorant of such a important fact about the War of Terror we're waging over there and around the globe. I've highlighted some key info in the quotes below. You can find it here.
Report of the
Defense Science Board Task Force
on
Strategic Communication

September 2004
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
For Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
Washington, D.C. 20301-3140


2.3 What is the Problem? Who Are We Dealing With?

The information campaign — or as some still would have it, “the war of ideas,” or the
struggle for “hearts and minds” — is important to every war effort. In this war it is an
essential objective, because the larger goals of U.S. strategy depend on separating the
vast majority of non-violent Muslims from the radical-militant Islamist-Jihadists. But
American efforts have not only failed in this respect: they may also have achieved the
opposite of what they intended.

American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature
of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to
single-digits in some Arab societies.
Muslims do not “hate our freedom,” but rather, they hate our policies. The
overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in
favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing
support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi
Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states.

• Thus when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic
societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy. Moreover, saying that
“freedom is the future of the Middle East” is seen as patronizing, suggesting that
Arabs are like the enslaved peoples of the old Communist World — but Muslims do
not feel this way: they feel oppressed, but not enslaved.
• Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq
has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering. U.S. actions
appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in
order to best serve American national interests
at the expense of truly Muslim self determination.

• Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire
radical Islamist bill of particulars. American actions and the flow of events have
elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy
among Muslims. Fighting groups portray themselves as the true defenders of an
Ummah (the entire Muslim community) invaded and under attack — to broad public
support.
• What was a marginal network is now an Ummah-wide movement of fighting groups.
Not only has there been a proliferation of “terrorist” groups: the unifying context of a
shared cause creates a sense of affiliation across the many cultural and sectarian
boundaries that divide Islam.
• Finally, Muslims see Americans as strangely narcissistic — namely, that the war is all
about us. As the Muslims see it, everything about the war is — for Americans —
really no more than an extension of American domestic politics and its great game.
This perception is of course necessarily heightened by election-year atmospherics, but
nonetheless sustains their impression that when Americans talk to Muslims they are
really just talking to themselves.


How does anyone not understand at this late a date that Islam and religion are not the root cause of the terrorism? Surely you've heard about the prevalence of 'Islam for Dummies' and 'The Koran for Dummies' bought by folk off to join ISIS? It has to be willful ignorance, that's the only thing that makes sense. Or gullibility, someone who believes the utterly compromised MSM. Considering this has been established in previous threads, and I think maybe I've had this same argument or something quite similar with you a while back, the willful ignorance explanation seems more likely.

Anyone could spend about 20 minutes on the google and figure this out for themselves, though it's kinda obvious when you consider how little truth you get out of Washington, how often we find out the exact opposite of what they've been telling us. Here, take a look at a recent Foreign Policy Institute piece, ISIS: The “unintended consequences” of the US-led war on Iraq


Warnings that trying to defeat ISIS by doing more of the same of what led to its rise in the first place are falling on deaf ears.



In a recent interview with Shane Smith, the founder of VICE News, President Barack Obama said: “ISIL is a direct outgrowth of Al Qaeda in Iraq that grew out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences.” This admission is evidence of the general causality between Western military interventionism in the Muslim world, and the rise of reactionary armed militia groups. In this particular case, the US-led invasion of Iraq undoubtedly paved the way for the rise of the self-professed ‘Islamic State’, better known as ISIS. Depending on who highlights this “unintended consequence” when commenting on recent events in Iraq and Syria, it is usually given very little importance or completely dismissed. Understandably, the pro-war policymakers in Washington and London who orchestrated the invasion of a sovereign state based on false intelligence, would rather focus on how to “degrade and destroy” the monster they created, as opposed to acknowledging fault and accepting blame.
...


It's so bad, even the president is admitting it now, though anyone with half a brain understood this more than a decade and a half ago.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
-George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
User avatar
crank
RS Donator
 
Name: Sick & Tired
Posts: 10362
Age: 4
Male

Country: 2nd miasma on the left
Pitcairn (pn)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#10  Postby THWOTH » May 01, 2016 4:22 am

Observer.com wrote:...

Ms. Hirsi Ali warns against use of the words “extreme” and “radical” to describe as peripheral an ideology which, she argues, is in fact quite prevalent in Muslim communities around the globe, and which leads easily to violence—whether in the form of female genital mutilation or honor killings or wife-beating or suicide bombings. She views the reliance on those words as self-delusion, a soothing, self-administered palliative whose effect is to mask evidence that violence is the largely natural extension of fundamentalist values sternly dictated and widely embraced in Muslim communities—values that encourage harsh treatment of women and strict, even brutal, punishment of non-believers. Her warnings, and those of others who risk their reputations and lives to criticize Islamic institutions, are distinctly unwelcome in many Western quarters, where they are regarded as grievously politically incorrect, and where the “few-bad-apples” narrative of Islamic extremism is vastly preferred.

The “few-bad-apples” narrative is what we experience in a largely secular, de-religionised West. Europe tried the 'believe or die' thing for 1500 years and it didn't work out well, even for those who took it to its logical conclusion. But I respect Ms. Ali and her distinction here between the individual believer and the community that identifies itself through a strict application of Islam. Still I'm not a fan of generalising from the particular, from either side of the fence, and I'm not quite ready to buy into the idea that just being Muslim is a problem in itself for everyone else, let alone one that requires condemnation of Muslims or treatment as a special case. Then again I have the luxury of not being condemned or treated as a special case, or threatened, for holding and expressing my opinion.
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
 
Name: Penrose
Posts: 37101
Age: 54

Country: Untied Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#11  Postby Rachel Bronwyn » May 01, 2016 10:45 am

Matthew Shute wrote:At considerable risk to herself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali actually stands up and speaks up for liberal values, in direct opposition to theocrats and regressive religious dogmas, unlike the smug pseudo-liberal imbeciles who want to call her an "Islamophobe" for doing so.


Yeah, that's why she told us to vote Harper.

She's really not very liberal. She made her name in the US working for a neocon think tank. It's a false assumption that, because she's critical of Islam, she's particularly liberal. She's not. She is an impressive person in many respects. Her politics aren't particularly liberal though.

People constantly whine that she's picked on by regressive liberal white people in the western world for criticising Islam but a lot of the criticism of her I see is perfectly reasonable and isn't reactionary defense of Islam and Muslims. It's criticism of her neoconservatism and tunnel vision on a lot of issues and dismissiveness towards complaints re: less extreme examples of discrimination.

Why people are so fucking quick to white knight for her, insisting criticism of her is all dumb, I don't know. She's an adult human being who says really smart and really dumb things, worthy or being viewed through a critical lens. She's not made of glass.
User avatar
Rachel Bronwyn
 
Name: a certain type of girl
Posts: 12983
Age: 31
Female

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#12  Postby crank » May 01, 2016 11:51 am

These last two ^^^ :thumbup:

A little criticism and some are driven straight into an extremist position, can't allow themselves to see or hear anything that might budge them off their position. The perfect example is Sam Harris. who made such a fool of himself, first with Noam Chomsky 'debate', and then by claiming Ben Carson understood the terrorism situation better than Chomsky. Or those still claiming terrorism is a product of Islamic extremism and/or religious fundamentalism.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
-George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
User avatar
crank
RS Donator
 
Name: Sick & Tired
Posts: 10362
Age: 4
Male

Country: 2nd miasma on the left
Pitcairn (pn)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#13  Postby laklak » May 01, 2016 2:53 pm

scott1328 wrote:
laklak wrote:There is a subset of modern 'liberals' who just fucking LOVE to be offended. They'll pick anything and run with it. My response is usually to double down on whatever they're enraged about, they're so cute when the get all purpley faced and start spitting. Besides, what they gonna do about it? I'm the one with the guns.

Twitter block-bot.


I don't even know what that means. I don't Twit.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19799
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#14  Postby Thomas Eshuis » May 01, 2016 3:24 pm

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:At considerable risk to herself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali actually stands up and speaks up for liberal values, in direct opposition to theocrats and regressive religious dogmas, unlike the smug pseudo-liberal imbeciles who want to call her an "Islamophobe" for doing so.


Yeah, that's why she told us to vote Harper.

She's really not very liberal. She made her name in the US working for a neocon think tank. It's a false assumption that, because she's critical of Islam, she's particularly liberal. She's not. She is an impressive person in many respects. Her politics aren't particularly liberal though.

People constantly whine that she's picked on by regressive liberal white people in the western world for criticising Islam but a lot of the criticism of her I see is perfectly reasonable and isn't reactionary defense of Islam and Muslims. It's criticism of her neoconservatism and tunnel vision on a lot of issues and dismissiveness towards complaints re: less extreme examples of discrimination.

Why people are so fucking quick to white knight for her, insisting criticism of her is all dumb, I don't know. She's an adult human being who says really smart and really dumb things, worthy or being viewed through a critical lens. She's not made of glass.

:this:
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 30219
Age: 30
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#15  Postby scott1328 » May 01, 2016 4:02 pm

laklak wrote:
scott1328 wrote:
laklak wrote:There is a subset of modern 'liberals' who just fucking LOVE to be offended. They'll pick anything and run with it. My response is usually to double down on whatever they're enraged about, they're so cute when the get all purpley faced and start spitting. Besides, what they gonna do about it? I'm the one with the guns.

Twitter block-bot.


I don't even know what that means. I don't Twit.

The SJW formerly of A+ invented a piece of sofware called the block bot to block any Twitter user who happened to be on their list of undesirables AND any Twitter user who followed anyone on their list of undesirables.
User avatar
scott1328
 
Name: Some call me... Tim
Posts: 8573
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#16  Postby laklak » May 01, 2016 4:04 pm

Ah, now it makes sense. I need a Real Life version of that. I have a beta version, called a 9mm, but the aftereffects can be a bit harsh.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19799
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#17  Postby THWOTH » May 01, 2016 4:09 pm

scott1328 wrote:
laklak wrote:
scott1328 wrote:
laklak wrote:There is a subset of modern 'liberals' who just fucking LOVE to be offended. They'll pick anything and run with it. My response is usually to double down on whatever they're enraged about, they're so cute when the get all purpley faced and start spitting. Besides, what they gonna do about it? I'm the one with the guns.

Twitter block-bot.


I don't even know what that means. I don't Twit.

The SJW formerly of A+ invented a piece of sofware called the block bot to block any Twitter user who happened to be on their list of undesirables AND any Twitter user who followed anyone on their list of undesirables.

I believe it also blocked people according to their use of certain blacklisted 'trigger' words. Snazzy.
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
 
Name: Penrose
Posts: 37101
Age: 54

Country: Untied Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#18  Postby Matthew Shute » May 01, 2016 4:49 pm

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:At considerable risk to herself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali actually stands up and speaks up for liberal values, in direct opposition to theocrats and regressive religious dogmas, unlike the smug pseudo-liberal imbeciles who want to call her an "Islamophobe" for doing so.


Yeah, that's why she told us to vote Harper.


Her basic reasoning:

can.png
can.png (11.91 KiB) Viewed 2451 times


...which, since radical Islam is the greatest threat to liberal values on the planet, she preferred over a candidate who once said that calling honour killing "barbaric" sets the wrong tone.

I sort of see her point.

She's really not very liberal.


Can you actually name any illiberal or anti-liberal positions she holds? Or are you going to use innuendo and guilt by association? Such as...

She made her name in the US working for a neocon think tank.


You're aware she worked there because left wing organisations abandoned her, right? Instead of saying where she worked, can you give a specific example of a "neocon" view she has, that you object to? Or is throwing the guilt by association fallacy around sufficient to debunk her?

It's a false assumption that, because she's critical of Islam, she's particularly liberal.


She actually supports liberal principles like freedom of expression, against the theocratic assault upon these principles.

She's not.


Why? Because of these vapid points you've made? Nobody is arguing she's the perfect human or the ultimate embodiment of liberalism. She is, however, doing more to defend the values of liberalism than those who're jumping over themselves to capitulate to the attack upon these values, mostly by vilifying anyone who attempts it. The pseudo-liberals crying about "Islamophobia" because she's opposing a religion in the process.

She is an impressive person in many respects. Her politics aren't particularly liberal though.


Yes, you've asserted this several times in a row now. Any examples of illiberal or anti-liberal principles she endorses?

People constantly whine that she's picked on by regressive liberal white people in the western world for criticising Islam but a lot of the criticism of her I see is perfectly reasonable and isn't reactionary defense of Islam and Muslims.


FFS, have you seen the kind of vilification aimed at her on a daily basis, denouncing her as "vermin" and so on?

It's criticism of her neoconservatism and tunnel vision on a lot of issues and dismissiveness towards complaints re: less extreme examples of discrimination.


Any examples of any of these "neocon" views she constantly espouses? Or are you going to settle for the guilt by association fallacy?

Why people are so fucking quick to white knight for her, insisting criticism of her is all dumb, I don't know.


From what I've seen, she's for the most part a voice of sanity and clarity constantly being smeared by people with a fraction of the intellect and an even smaller fraction of the courage she has. If dismissing those who support her and show solidarity as "white knights" is supposed to make them back off and not say anything in her defence, well, think again.

She's an adult human being who says really smart and really dumb things, worthy or being viewed through a critical lens. She's not made of glass.


Straw men for the pyre, eh? Obviously she's not above criticism. Who said she was? I said she actually defends liberal principles against the religious assault upon them, risking her life to do so, unlike the gaggle of comfortable dimwits who want to shout her down for doing so. And, yes, obviously she's a tough person. If she wasn't so courageous, she wouldn't go anywhere near the topics she does. Your point is what? Does that mean I can't ridicule spineless "critics" who just want her to shut up about Islam?
"Change will preserve us. It is the lifeblood of the Isles. It will move mountains! It will mount movements!" - Sheogorath
User avatar
Matthew Shute
 
Name: Matthew Shute
Posts: 3676
Age: 41

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#19  Postby Thomas Eshuis » May 01, 2016 4:53 pm

Matthew Shute wrote:
Rachel Bronwyn wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:At considerable risk to herself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali actually stands up and speaks up for liberal values, in direct opposition to theocrats and regressive religious dogmas, unlike the smug pseudo-liberal imbeciles who want to call her an "Islamophobe" for doing so.


Yeah, that's why she told us to vote Harper.


Her basic reasoning:

can.png


...which, since radical Islam is the greatest threat to liberal values on the planet, she preferred over a candidate who once said that calling honour killing "barbaric" sets the wrong tone.

I sort of see her point.

Perhaps with regards to the other guy's record on Islam, but the notion that radical Islam, specifically, is the greatest threat to liberal values is black and white nonsense.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 30219
Age: 30
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Why Ayaan Hirsi's Criticism of Islam Angers Western Liberals

#20  Postby crank » May 01, 2016 9:12 pm

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:
Rachel Bronwyn wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:At considerable risk to herself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali actually stands up and speaks up for liberal values, in direct opposition to theocrats and regressive religious dogmas, unlike the smug pseudo-liberal imbeciles who want to call her an "Islamophobe" for doing so.


Yeah, that's why she told us to vote Harper.


Her basic reasoning:

can.png


...which, since radical Islam is the greatest threat to liberal values on the planet, she preferred over a candidate who once said that calling honour killing "barbaric" sets the wrong tone.

I sort of see her point.

Perhaps with regards to the other guy's record on Islam, but the notion that radical Islam, specifically, is the greatest threat to liberal values is black and white nonsense.

And you can add in there that thinking this leads to wanting more interventions in the region which is really the best way to further radical Islam.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
-George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
User avatar
crank
RS Donator
 
Name: Sick & Tired
Posts: 10362
Age: 4
Male

Country: 2nd miasma on the left
Pitcairn (pn)
Print view this post

Next

Return to Islam

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest