Moderate Muslims & Terror Attacks
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- It's too hot today.
Content Warning: FGM, racism, homophobia
Contact:
/ shaun_jen
curiouscat.me/...
/ shaun_jen
Sources:
www.independent...
www.mcb.org.uk/...
www.theguardia...
en.wikipedia.o...
metro.co.uk/201...
metro.co.uk/201...
www.independent...
www.manchestere...
www.standard.co...
metro.co.uk/201...
edition.cnn.com...
news.sky.com/st...
www.abc.net.au/...
docs.google.co...
Sargon video:
• Terror Attacks via Veh...
Any sources I missed available on request.
"Why ain't the moderate muslims condemning the extremists" he says violently clicking on page after page of The Daily Stormer and Breitbart.
Whilst digesting Steven Crowder, Kraut and Tea and Sargon Videos, simultaneously informed by Ben Shapiro's skewed statistical 'findings' and Maher's politically 'incorrect' ramblings on Islam. Sometimes it's so easy to be oblivious to the echo chamber you've immersed yourself in, lol. Confirmation bias at its finest.
"How could I possibly be uninformed? I spend 8 hours a day watching UA-cam!"
Best comment ever! :D
@El Aquapimp wut
@@Lulu_Lime dont expect a reply
Yes, but how many of these so-called "moderate" muslims have condemned burnt toast?
NONE, I've seen the map. That accurate, not at all problematic, map.
Don't you mean avocado toast?
I've Covered Wars Ya Know checkmate sjews
Is your username a Michael Cole reference?
ToruKun1 nah, it's an old Dead Rising meme
"Why don't moderate Muslims fight against terrorism"
The Iraqi army:am I a joke to you?
the Pakistani millitary crack downs and total wars on these terrorist scum: SAY WAAAAAAAA?!
Indonesian anti-terrorism units: am I a joke to you?
Well the army did sorta disband when daesh popped up.
@@aaaak4 bruh... what?
@@ShoreshFathi When Daesh/ISIL/ISIS popped up big parts of the army under Al-Malikis disbanded when daesh attacked which meant that weapons that the west had supplied to train the new iraqi army got into the hands of daesh. Furthermore a lot of sunnis from the ba'ath party joined early daesh as many sunnis were unsatisfied with Al-Maliki and what was thought by a lot of sunnis to be a shia bias (where it had been a clear sunni bias with Saddam).
The real question we should be asking is, "Why don't moderate conservatives condemn the January 6 coup attempt?"
Lol
I know some who just pretend it didn’t happen and get really mad about “the media lying” when it’s brough up
Well, they still think that it was Antifa in disguise
Hard to condemn something when you were the one doing it
But that's different man it's only bad when the conservative group is muslim not american conservatives that support Trump. Lets go Brandon🤡🤡🤡
"They do"
Easy answer.
@El Aquapimp
You:Watches 2 seconds of the video
Rational human : Did u even watch the video?
You: Uhhhhmmmmmmmm....
@Unapologetic Infidel. He directly pointed out that people DO report it. Futility is not in bothering to report, futility is in hoping that you will be able to stamp out all terrorism if you just try.
What it means is that just because terror attacks still happen it doesn't mean that people of the same faith don't condemn it and don't do their part to counteract it.
@Absolute Mad Lad Are you searching for an excuse for your narrative in one case (where honestly, most likely you didn't even try to find the condemnations)?
Because that's what I see.
@Absolute Mad Lad and that's why you are going to justify your islamophobia and dehumanize them all. :)
Have fun in your hate-filled life.
Absolute Mad Lad Let the Quran condemn rape: [Quran 5:5] …….. You shall maintain CHASTITY, not committing adultery, nor taking secret lovers. Anyone who rejects faith, all his work will be in vain, and in the Hereafter he will be with the losers.
[Quran 24:30] Tell the believing men that they shall subdue their eyes (and not stare at the women), and to maintain their CHASTITY. This is purer for them. God is fully Cognizant of everything they do.
[Quran 24:31] And tell the believing women to subdue their eyes, and maintain their CHASTITY.
Where are all the moderate Muslims I'm purposely ignoring? Why haven't them come to my house to personally talk me out of my prejudices in this time of tragedy?
They're too busy raping lower-class children to come to a middle-class home like yours, just the way you like it.
Roger Lost What the fuck is wrong with you?
No, that's Catholic priests.
p.s. Kaitlyn, I want this to be a tweet so I can save it and retweet it endlessly every time this argument comes up. This is perfect.
+methecsgod "4. There is an inordinate degree of excuses that are lavished on muslims for any misbehaviour. Isn't it a funny coincidence that you are afraid to criticize islamic terrorism out of fear of being blown up?"
My dude, he just did. They straight up stated it preaches violence against non-believers, read. Most of us aren't scared of getting blown up just like we aren't scared of being struck by lightning. Not everyone is paranoid.
I thought all of these "classical liberals" were for individualism? Banning whole groups of people over collective guilt doesn't seem very individualist or liberal to me.
And he isn't even good at collective guilt. I know Shaun already mentioned this idiocy somewhere else, but whenever I hear that soundbit were he says "I would report ENGLISH people as well" I scream. Reminds me of one of his fans telling me that Stalin was worse than Hitler, because Hitler didn't kill "his own people". Oh ok, I guess our jews were just from Jewsten in Jewistan, well known neighbouring country of Germany -_-
casersatz Who is banning whole groups of people? If you're talking about Trump, Le pen and others, they are not "classical liberals". Even though some classical liberals supported these candidates, they don't necessarily support the Muslim ban.
B0badenvero8 Exceptions to the rule arent just pulled out of ass whenever it convenient for you, that would make you a hypocrite.
Go on, you say there are exceptions, why is that?
I know for certain that SoA is anti-immigration. Kraut and Tea is. I guess the problem is with some of these UA-cam C.L.s is that they spend a lot of time on how bad and scary Muslims are, but they leave the "what is to be done?" part relatively vague. As if they're uncertain about being tied to any one solution and just sort of wink and say "connect the dots".
Even your example involves describing people in collective terms ("group", you said). That dodges SLYKM's question about why this "exception to the rule" is permissible in the first place.
I hate Hannah Garrs personally for spelling “Hordes” as “Hoards”, as if people have been saving Muslims up and keeping them in a vault like some sort of dragon.
Omg this made me lmao
I know you didn’t mean this to be funny, but dammit.😂
I just want to point out that Sargon's hypothetical "I would totally report it!" doesn't hold when you look at how people like him tend to react to…other crimes, like say, sexual harassment done by people they know. Suddenly it's "but they're a cool person, I know them well, they'd NEVER do that!"
[Disclaimer: i don't know if Sargon himself ever did that because, believe it or not, i'm not hanging on to his every word.]
So you know what Sargon might hypothetically say based on what he has hypothetically said before?
You’re not like the people you hate at all. You’re such a good and virtuous person. Thank you for everything you do to spread tolerance and understanding. Unlike Sargon, hypothetically.
@@Broodsugar Someone touched a nerve.
or worse, sexual harassment is reported and trash like sargon say the accuser was lying and only doing it for attention or to gain idk what, i totally agree with what you mean
he sounds like he would report a muslim for looking at him wrong. when would he ever become aware of islamic terrorism like he’s so random
i guarantee he does not have muslim friends therefore there’s literally no reason he would become aware before the persons surrounding the terrorist
he’s literally just making up a white savior hero story in his mind for him & his white guy viewers to fantasize about together
him and his viewers are pathetic i’m glad he’s irrelevant now
Oh, I am seeing PragerU video named "Where are moderate Muslims?" on my YT feed. I am pretty sure it is very nuanced.
Kid Kool maybe even as nuanced as the videos where they argue for climate change skepticism and creationism.
Nah, it's not nuanced. But neither is Shaun unfortunately. As an ex-muslim I see a lot of things that Shaun missed to mention or created a false equivalency. That noted I would like to say that he's completely right on the points he discussed. So still, seeing multiple perspectives will give you more info, instead of watching just Shaun and similar people
@@sananguliyev4940 don't shy away from voicing your opinion. What points is Shaun making a false equivalency? What did he miss? If you're serious about getting people to get more viewpoints, you should not just vaguely tell us to trust you or other unnamed sources.
@@_ch1pset out of the top of my head I could name 2 main points that he missed.
First, the doctrine differences between Islam and Christianity. Islam leaves much less wiggle room for interpretation, because Quran is not as vague as the Bible. It's not just stories, it has a lot of orders and laws. Also, Islam have Hadith (sayings of Muhammad), where you have a lot of horrible stuff. And because Muhammad is considered a perfect man, Muslims have 2 choices: accept the horrible as normal or say that it was corrupted. Moderates (if they even have read them) will choose the latter, however many don't. Also those who read history of Islam, normalise execution, capture of enemies, enslavement etc. So, all in all the nature of these religions is different, because founders were different. Jesus was basically a nobody with a small following, Mohammad was a warlord.
So, Islam in principle is more violent than other religions, but we can all agree that socioeconomics play a huge role in interpretation. Richer societies and people tend to stray away from religion and interpret it more spiritually. The same is happening in Islamic countries. The same is happening in my countries (I grew up in 2 secular but Muslim dominated countries). However, you need to always note that Muslim countries tend to be more intolerant that others in the same income category. There's much less freedom and larger proportion of people carry destructive ideas. There have been studies on how many people support killing the gays, apostates etc in Muslim countries. Even homophobic Christian countries like Russia don't support death. When gays were killed in Chechnya, most Russians were appalled, but Chechens cheered. And it all boils down to what has been written in the book. These ideas stem from there and circulate in people's heads.
Western liberals tend to have contact with educated Muslims, therefore they are very biased. But we ex-muslims, we see it from multiple perspectives, the doctrine, the good interpretation, the bad interpretation, the effects on society and the way people think. And I think it is important for people like Shawn to talk about the negatives too in a nuanced manner, because if liberals continue saying only positives despite the obvious signs, the negatives will get picked up by someone else. And trust me, they are gonna put an all-bad spin on this.
@@sananguliyev4940 thank you for giving an honest assessment of your native religion, it does confirm a few assumptions I had about the Quran and hadiths themselves. Do you think something akin to the enlightenment for Christianity needs to happen for Islam to become non threatening, more morally aligned and integrate better into western culture?
As a Muslim extremely against terror, I love this video.
Knowledgeable Reaction
Watch the " Apostate prophet" an ex- Muslim exposing Islam and risking his own life, since in Islam apostasy is punishble by death.
Knowledgeable Reaction
What do you think of the passage in the quran sanctioning wife beatings, sura 4:34.
Under what circumstances Muslims beat their wives like the quran orders?
Should we promote wife beatings for disobedient wives in the west? afterall it is Allah’ s word.
Why are Muslim men allowed to have 4 women?
Why do Muslim men think the woman is supposed to obey the men, why Muslim men do not “ obey” women?
Ah, yes because the cult book instructs differently.
Last question.
In several passages of the qur’ an Muslims, such as sura 5:33, are instructed to cut off hands and feet.
Under what circumstance cutting off body parts is acceptable ?
Weird how the rational skeptic/new atheist community has turned people into proselytizing whackos as we see in these replies to the original comment. I wonder does this make them feel righteous as if they're doing "not God's" work, defending "western culture".
Right-wingers: "Islam hasn't reformed its understanding of the Quran the way Christianity and Judaism have with their holy texts, that's why it's a problem."
Also right-wingers: "How could you possibly be a Muslim against terror, don't you know what the literal interpretation of your holy text says?"
+Aud Richtig Coincidentally, the Bible also condones slavery and genocide and misogyny. It's almost as though old religions/customs look fucked up through a modern lens.
conservatives: gun laws don't work!
the same conservatives: travel bans work!
False dichotomy. lol
Also drug laws work.
What's even funnier is that most of the more severe kneejerk gun bans were put into action by conservatives in both the US and Australia, and probably many other places, too. If mental gymnastics were an olympic sport, boy there'd be some contenders there.
Yeah, keep those Syrians in Syria! Where they will die painfully! Because bombing the shit out of a country apparently doesn't count as encouraging migration.
Bigot who is irrationally afraid of Syrian children who would like to not die whines about "stupid, mindless emotional decisions."
An attempt to reduce terrorism: Stop imperialism, stop the funding of terrorist affiliated organisations, increase the number of police investigators and safety checks, educate people.
"If you want to stop terrorism, stop participating in it" --Noam Chomsky.
Safety checks won't actually help. It usually breaks down to more the perception of security than actual security. It's a way to silently sweep away freedoms, bit by bit, while providing the illusion of helping.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, however.
Yeah that's true. I just put safety checks in there as I thought of them more as being used to prevent weapons from coming in to certain places. (Arenas, malls and such.) Although it wont stop terrorism at all, I guess it at least reduces it, by making it harder to occur.
But yeah, we certainly got to think more long-term and for all of us, not just the west.
Everybody Loves Rasmus get rid of war profiteering and occupation profiteering too.
@Absolute Mad Lad that doesn't make sense. Studying maths won't make you understand how society works. In order to prevent terrorism you should teach history, psychology, philosophy, etc. And not isolate people. I suppose Bin Laden had a degree of engineering IN ORDER to commit acts of terrorism.
@@DWilliams-l3f thousands of muslims do believe in Quran but they interpret those violent verses differently
Same thing Christians have done for centuries. It's not like Bible is a peaceful book you know
As someone who's loved one is Muslim, thanks for giving such a clear video essay to combat anti-Islamic sentiments. My bf is incredibly nice and he converted to try and find a community and a place with religious ideals he agreed with, none of which are sexist or homophobic, and the idea that he's somehow terrible and violent because of his religious beliefs honestly upsets me. Yet I see plenty of people threatening Muslims in my country (the US) with violence based solely on their faith.
Christianity has been used to commit genocide in the past, but people seem to conveniently forget these facts when someone kills people for Christian beliefs they twisted to fit their own cruel whims. Christianity was at one point, by some people, used to defend slavery, rampant homophobia and child abuse. No religion is free of people misusing it for their own bigotry, and Islam is no exception, and it's certainly not the rule.
Christianity still is used today to promote homophobia, discrimination and child abuse
@TMVGemini24 (Pee) As a Christian it saddens me because Jesus came to save the world not destroy it. I just want people to know Christianity doesn't promote racism, child abuse, or slavery. Christianity is the reason I'm a egalitarian, and anti imperialist. The bible says all humans are equal, and what really makes me mad to my core is when so called Christians are antisemitic. Jesus is Jewish, most of the original Christians were jews, and the apostles were jews. Also not to mention the far right ironically have more in common with Islamic terrorists then the teachings of Jesus, I don't agree with Muslims spiritually, and to me islam is false but if we Christians genuinely love Muslims we should not
hate Muslims or hurt them. The so called counter jihad movement pushes for wars against Iran but they'll like Saudi Arabia, or any other dictatorship tomorrow if they support Israels government. Christians should show Muslims the truth in love and not hate or hurt Muslims, or support wars in Muslim countries.
Islam is one of the most bigoted regions though.
@@ashtonsherrod7824but it does promote slavery. Most Christians believe in objective morality, source of it being the Bible. Then when confronted with slavery promoted in Bible Christians say it was "because of the times those people lived in", ergo making morality subjective. Go figure...
As a Muslim I can not thank you enough for these kind of videos.
We always condemn attacks and prevent them and yet we hear people say that we never condemn it and we are all sympathisers and are complicit? it is very sad and disheartening to hear those things, sometimes it feels like we can never win. Thankfully people like you show the truth.
You speak with logic and facts.
Love the videos keep it up brother 🙏❤️
Sadly, all throughout history the good people have to suffer with, and because of, the bad people... Once you're stigmatised it's so easy to be condemned for stuff you didn't do or support, just because the people doing it pretend to act under the same ideals.
What boggles my mind are the people who say "Ban Islam! Only Catholics/Christians know how to behave!" If I encounter one of these people, my response is always "So what do you think the Crusades were?"
I think the saddest thing is that white people (I am white so do not crucify me for this.) Will often attack Muslims and other non white groups for the extremists who bad things but will often ignore or defend white extremism.
"We always condemn attacks and prevent them and yet we hear people say that we never condemn it and we are all sympathisers and are complicit? " Show us your condemnation please . Thank you.
@@bulltraderptYou're aware what video you left this comment on, right?
Why do these people assume that all Muslims have to answer for the crimes of people they've never met and don't know anything about?
Dewayne C Because they're racist, :/
I think racist is the wrong word as Islam is not a race. The correct phrase would be that these people are prejudice, I think.
So does Christianity.
The same reason the leftist hypocrite promote "white privilege".
Have you read the bible or the Quran?
WhY DoEsN'T ThE RiGhT condemned the violence during the unite the right rally?
That's because there is nothing to apologize for. The woman couldn't be hit by a car because according to the laws of physics it is impossible to truly touch something. The SJWs have gone so far that they are willing to break the laws of physics to smear us, a group of very fine people. Sad!
because he is too busy creating conspiracy theories about how the victims actually all just had heart attacks so therefore were not killed at all, but run over by a car post mortem
Man, looking back on this, "Unite the Right" being the go-to example of white supremacy-related right wing violence at the time makes me sad because now you have so many more to pick from.
@@emperortgp2424 to be honest, you calling yourselves "very fine people" while calling certain people groups to be bad and deserved to be of a lower status is kinda ironic.
Alexander Christopher He was being sarcastic
Why doesn't Sargon condemn harassment from GamerGaters?
Chris Succee Since when was receiving constant death/rape threats just "mean words"?
@@nonfinale685 No they're not, they're comparing supposed endorsement through inaction to supposed endorsement through inaction.
Death Threats are not covered under free speech.
@Absolute Mad Lad After all the rape and death threats she received this whole "cRiTCisM" thing is nothing but a farce to me. She cannot leave the house anymore without fearing to be attacked, and dipshits like you are downplaying it, like seriously. How dense can someone be.
he did condemn it iirc
17:58 Mosque attendance is one of the most effective methods at curbing radicalization.
Higher regular mosque attendance decreases radicalization significantly for a variety of reasons, most notably reinforcing a sense of community that's harder for radicals to penetrate. The only exception to this rule are underground, extremist mosques that form small cults around cell leaders, which are usually noticed and shut down.
The only reason I am not linking any sources is because this piece of data is so common. It's in every book and study on radicalization. Like, it was even referenced in Four Lions. They radicalize another guy into their cell by telling him he should stop going to mosque.
Well said
period!!!
Please stop, just stop defending abrahamic religions
"If it were my community that were violent, of course i would try to stop them!!"
"why is it my responsibilty to condemn the small minority of my community who are violent?? #notallmen"
And yet, somehow, in the mind of Carlgon, and probably most of his ideological collegues, *everyone else* behaves like an irrational, self-contradictory hypocrite.
Ewww hypocrisy
As a Welsh guy, I don't oppose banning Wales.
Sut wut ti
The one kinda comment I was looking for
What about whales?
@@fulcrum2951 i guess this has anything to do with that South Park episode
Why wont "moderate muslims" report posible future terrorists attacks to the authorities before they happen?
Well Sargon, first of all, sometimes they do when they can.
And the other thing is that, no one is capable of reading minds. It´s not like people (especially strangers) dont keep secrets from others regardless if they are part of the same community.
And lets be honest ...People would still acusse "moderate muslims" of being complicit regardless because of people like you, who need that shock value for that sweet ad revenue money.
Absolute Mad Lad If I talk in poetry, I can sound smart
If my words are in stanzas, people might respect me.
@Absolute Mad Lad How are you right? You just said things in a vague way and expected people to understand. HOW is Moderate Islam a shield? HOW is Moderate Islam the soil?
@@joedav67 Well, you see, they're all The Bad People (Tm) who are coming to kill all of us because teh evulz!!1!, and whom we must fight back against in Glorious Battle (Tm), probably by becoming fascists (because the people who's ideological progenitors caused the large influx of muslims and other minorities over the last couple of generations have, shall we say... _special_, pattern recognition abilities). Really is as simple as that to some people. Sad, really.
I hate how this guy goes like "why moderate muslims don't report it?" and doesn't immediately pick up on the most obvious answer in the world
Everytine I listen to one of Sargon's argument I feel like some of my brain cells die
I'm surprised you still have braincells after listening to Sargon
"Apologies, but when ClapTrap speaks, I feel my brain cells commuting suicide one by one" - Sir Hammerlock (Borderlands 2)
FFS, my recommended UA-cam videos are now full of weirdos explaining how Islam will kill us all.
N F
As a former Muslim I find it shocking that I find far left morons such as yourselves defending Islam. The funny thing is, it actually will kill you all and you still defend it.
@@هدي-ه8ظ that's a troll account
Ah the good old conservative “say easily disproven thing, get disproven, ignore it and say easily disproven thing again”
Yep
10:40 People like Sargon and Kraut want every Muslim to fly/drive to the door of their house after every terror attack and say "We condemn this terror attack".
They would probably call the police on those guys.
Kraut?
@@alaric_3015
I don't know much about Krauts older videos since e pretty much deleted almost all of them.But from the little I know,he was very anti Islam.
@@mitchelli.o.6283 Kraut, as in three part turkish history video kraut?
It would seem that he's changed his views lately.
At least, I hope so. I really like his newer videos and I hope he's as progressive as he seems.
@@SolarFlareAmerica Yeah, Kraut (in his old nickname Kraut and Tea) was pretty much an ''anti-sjw skeptical rational'' type and he was debating/friending with Sargon, Thunderfootlikes. But yes he changed and he makes quality videos about geopolitics now I even checked his discord there are fine people there. But he got a lot of bullying from the alt-right when he started to expose them, he still kinda calls him anti-sjw thou.
23 minute break from my depression
same
100% tru
🎶 watanegiconsu 🎶 yupi pa ti 🎶 yupi pa mi 🎶 wuri wuri wanaga 🎶 WEPA WEAP 🎶
Seek help if you need to
lol
Adding "moderate" to Muslim is a sneaky rhetorical trick. It's kind of like "the good Samaritan." Adding the modifier implies that the default Samaritan is not good, or in this case, that the default Muslim must be "extreme."
Exactly
It is worse than the Good Samaritan. In the original context, Jews already assumed Samaritans were bad people by default (while priests and Levites, the two social groups the men who passed the wounded traveler on the road belonged too, had social prestige). The original text doesn't really call him a "good Samaritan", just a Samaritan. Jesus just used the local social stereotypes to emphasize the actual point (tl; dr, it is implied the guy asking Jesus "who is my neighbor" was trying to find an angle to excuse himself when Jesus said "love your neighbor", so basically it is a shorter way of saying "cut the in-group/out-group crap you're going for, any and everyone existing next to you counts"). When section titles were added to the bible (no in the original text), adding the adjective and the implication that the standard Samaritan is not good, it helps to give the reader a more context accurate reading with just one word.
Basically, what I am saying is that in the good Samaritan the negative implication actually has a useful and arguably good purpose, where "moderate Muslim" exists solely to poison the well.
Also, its unempirical ("idealistic" as marxists like to say), and sociologically illiterate to focus on sacred texts, and ideas in general, as an excuse to be against (organized) religion. it ignores the material reality of human existence.
Levels of religiosity are determined by material, social conditions, not faith. The christian community became meaningfully reformed in the modern era not because of debates with the majority of christians and using arguments to make them see the merits of skepticism (nor by repressing christianity, or spreading prejudice and hostility towards it, or ridiculing it) - it was due to bettering of social conditions, like less oppression, more secularism, more education, less inequality, less poverty, less economic insecurity.
Also, the muslim community reformed in the modern era, too. Neither of those religious communities are anything like they were in the middle ages. The muslim community is lagging behind in a minute degree, because of worse material/ social conditions. And even that's questionable concerning some issues, being that large numbers of christians (due to some sort of religious sentiment) support western imperialist wars (one of which eg was started by a conservative christian american president who thought god was telling him to invade a country), which kill far, far more people that jihadist terrorism. Which, btw, kills almost exlusively people who are not in the west, and primarily muslims. More people in the west die of peanut allergy than of jihadist terrorism. The islam(ist) scare is a propaganda routine to replace the red scare as the narrative to support western imperialism.
And it's interesting to note actually how good the muslim community has progressed. As said, like christians, muslims are nothing like they were in the middle ages. Yes, they are lagging behind with progress, but just very little, and surprisingly little. Consider that unlike christians, they didn't have the enlightenment era develop among them, and they didn't have a couple of centuries of social improvement with regard to religious toleration, repression, education, poverty, inequality, etc, it's quite great that they have progressed as much as they did. The western christian community did not and doesn't suffer colonialism, imperialism and neocolonialism, it was and is in freer, richer and more stable societies than muslims are, and yet they are only very little more progressive than muslims. I don't know if it's the muslims who have progressed more then it's to be expected, or if the christians have progressed less than it's to be expected..
Anyway, human beings are primarily material beings, biological and social beings, and after that (if at all) aloof minds fueled by pure and free willpower and driven by sets of ideas. It's simply a fact that humans are primarily material beings and that their average behaviour is determined primarily by material conditions. Even the tiny minority which are the fundamentalists, for whom we have reason to say that their behaviour is determined by specific sets of religious ideas (because their behaviours when eating, dressing, praying, etc actually correlate in large degree to holy books), even they are not people who are driven solely by ideas, because they are not incorporeal beings. They have impulses, emotional habits, social ties, life experiences, and various views, intuitions, and preferences which are there due to various biological and social influences, and all those factors play into the choices they make. Take sunni islamism, ie salafism, for example, there are equally good quranic and hadithic arguments for madkhalism (politically pacifist movement which holds that god controls states, and people in general shouldnt take any interest in them, not even to advocate reforms) and sahwaism (politically pacifist movement also which sees rebellions as great a sin and approves only of preaching reforms) as there are for jihadism (politically militant movement which advocates rebellions), and we can ask the question why do some islamists choose not to be madkhalis and sahwais, but instead choose to be jihadis? Is it a choice made purely on ideas, or did material conditions influence their choice? So even here, where we're talking about this minute subset of people which are fundamentalists - it is not clear we can blame faith instead of primarily the material conditions.
The bottom line, it is not islam or muslims or faith or religious people which should be opposed, at least not head-on, and certainly not as a primary target, it is imperialism, neocolonialism, and social stratification which should be opposed.
And i want to note that i say "focus", and "primary target" of activism, not the only thing to oppose. Of course we should deal with culture, and oppose right-wing (/intolerant) ideas, no matter if theyre religious, ethnic, etc.
Of course, we should firstly do that by watching out that we dont participate in it ourselves by practicing faulty generalizations, assigning guilt by association, etc. This of course includes not having the prevalent distorted focus of attention where the crimes of "others" are given much more attention, time, words, outrage, etc, than "our" crimes, take for example killed civilians, much more muslim civilians are killed by western imperialist terrorism, then western civilians are killed by jihadist terrorism, and looking at the disproportionate attention and reaction some westerners (including much of the media) have towards this, those people are basically acting as if a western life is hundreds of thousands of times more valuable than a muslim life.
And a final detail, how many of you noticed the islamophobic detail in this previous sentence of mine, where i assumed that westerners and muslims are two separate groups? x) Of course we shouldnt do stuff like that, we need to strive against right-wing ideas, but we shouldnt lose from sight what is the main cause of the problems, the macro scale.
Actually, i want to say something else about context, and non-muslim western people condemning crimes committed by muslims, connected to my point above where i mentioned also the media, and dealing with culture, not just material conditions. There is no moral value in condemning bad things per se. Like, condemning crimes of Genghis Khan is trivial. Moral value is constituted by consequences, not proclamations. There is moral value in condemning bad things when you can thereby make an influence against them. The point is not to have nice proclamations and to win debates, but to improve things, at least not contribute to them being bad.
A non-muslim westerner condemning bad things which some muslims do not only has no moral value, it, as a rule, has moral disvalue, bc it plays into the islam(ist) scare, the main narrative of western imperialism, and plays into hostility among the right-wingers of both sides.
Its similar like during the cold war people in the ussr were condemning stuff done by usa, and people in the usa were condemning stuff done by ussr, they werent doing anything constructive, the opposite actually, they just increased bias and hostility. The people who were doing something constructive were the ones criticizing stuff near themselves, where they could influence something.
First take the plank out of your own eye, to quote jesus, lol.
Condemning bad things which some muslims do is mostly something which should be done by muslims, ex-muslims, people live among muslims, and similar people. Westerners who are not muslim condemning bad stuff some muslims do is almost always islamophobia, only in rare cases is such a westerner really objective and dedicates much more of his time and energy being against bad stuff closer to home.
About the trope of muslim patriarchy and why dont leftists oppose it. Besides it being a loaded question being that we do, primarily by supporting people from among muslims who oppose it, it is just islamophobia for the above stated reason. Rape culture which exists among non-muslim western men is many times bigger problem for the west than the rape culture which exists among muslims western men, simply due to the simple fact of population disparity, muslims are just a couple of percent of the population. A non-muslim western men talking against rape culture among muslims, but not talking twenty times more about the rape culture among non-muslim men - is obviously not interested in rape culture but instrumentalizes women who suffer under patriarchy and rape culture so he can spread prejudice and bigotry against muslims, which is a super abominable combination, not only is spreading prejudice and bigotry bad, instrumentalizing the suffering of women is even more bad.
But lets say such a non-muslim western man does actually talk twenty times more about the rape culture among non-muslim western men than about the rape culture among muslim western men, does this mean he is totally ok to dedicate that smaller amount of time criticizing muslims? Well, not really, because we again need to take into consideration the context, and that he is criticizing "the others", who are a disadvantaged group globally and in society we live in, and that he is thereby playing into the negativity pointed towards those "other people" who are already socially disadvantaged. It is not the place of white people to randomly criticize black communities or movements, the place of men to randomly criticize women and feminism, the place of people who have nothing to do with muslims to criticize muslim communities, etc, even if they do spend much time criticizing "their own", so, the proportion should be evem more tilted in one direction.
But aren't we being unequal here, inegalitarian, and acting in some way in favor of muslims here, isnt this tilting of attention on one side "biased" and "unjust"? Well, to be rational and just does not mean to live in an ivory tower and use a naive, superficial, and bastardized concept of equality as an excuse to ignore and exacerbate the existing inequalities. To be for formal equality in situations of inequality is to support the existing inequality.
Anyways, in practice all this basically means: if you're a cishet white non-muslim man, and feel like criticizing someone, dont choose the marginalized communities, you should dedicate yourself to criticizing yourself and your community (and it's culture) which is the dominant one at those intersections of social relations; don't talk about bad stuff among marginalized people except very rarely, preferably only when asked about, and just to say "of course I'm against it, that's a bad thing, and I extend my solidarity to activists in that community fighting against that".
And, of course, as i said previously, start focusing on material conditions.
THANK YOU, FUCKING THANK YOU. Almost everything you wrote was a breath of fresh air (minor disagreements here and there;) but they're only healthy to have anywhere!) Special bonus for mentioning criticism of Muslims should primarily be reserved for Ex-Muslims, who have actually lived in Muslim communities/countries where apostasy/family/homophobic laws/stigmas affect us and not the white western, right-winger whose spent their entire lives in Northern Europe. I'm tired of seeing these disingenuous fucks pretend like Islamic laws harm them in any way whatsoever.
Also, a question for people, especially muslims, if you think it's innapropriate, what do you think would be a good alternative for "moderate muslim" - "radical muslim" terminology? I know "mainstream muslim" is suggested instead of "moderate muslim" by some. And additionally, do you think it would be interesting to try and talk about "moderate christians", who are anti-war, and "radical christians", who support the western imperialist wars and drone attacks?
I'd be much in favor if we could stop using the term "radical" incorrectly. At this point it is effectively impossible to determine what a radical manifestation of those faiths would look like. If one were to go by the specific scriptures as the point of origin (which they are not), "radical faiths" are basically oxymora due to how self-contradicting these texts are. Never mind that they span huge time frames with countless changes in orthodoxy. "Radical" really just doesn't mean anything but "extreme to the point of violence" here. That's not what the word means, though.
I suppose "moderate" doesn't really fit the bill either, since this would require some defined scale of what constitutes excess and moderation in religious practice. I don't think it maps to acts of violence seamlessly. We don't call regular Christians moderate either, so why not just stick with "Muslims"? They are, after all, the vast majority to such a point where one can not consider this a dichotomy with any reasonable intellectual honesty.
What do you mean imperialism and social standing influence terrorism? Southeast Asia was taken over by the French during colonial eras, and North and South Vietnam fought the Vietnam War with western powers shoving themselves in the mix ever so often. Many countries are damaged by imperialism in the area, and many SE Asian countries are hella poor. Guys ever heard of violent Buddhist organizations exploding buildings in the west and screaming Death to America? Not by any chance.
"And that's why there's no Terror attacks in China." Oh, well that's good. "Except, there are terror attacks in China!" *Audible Gasp!*
I'd also point out that even fundamentalist Muslims don't necessarily support terrorism. Certainly I take issue with aspects of fundamentalist Islam (like their views on women), but one can be a fundamentalist, even an extremist, without thinking it's fine to murder civilians as politican theater.
Of course the converse is also true: one can be non-fundamentalist in religious views and yet still support Islamic terrorism (as a Palestinian militant might).
They will still support the goals of creating a caliphate, they'll just sit on the sidelines
LOL what are you on about the Palestinians. Their land was stolen through U.S. funding tax money as aid to Israel. They are freedom fighters labeled by Zionist government as terrorists. You don't understand what's really happening in the Middle East with all those deceptive lies of invasion and WMDs and bomb their country in the name of "Democracy". Look for the Balfour Declaration, U.S.S. liberty, and AIPAC to get you started and read Christopher Bollyn books about 911 and the so-called war on terror. You won't be labeling such a situation as 'Islamic terrorism' once you know the bullshits done by Western government in their foreign policy in the M.E.
That’s obvious to everyone, considering that surveys say most muslims are fundamentalists who don’t like terrorism.
If your belief system attracts terrorists or extremists, maybe you should ask why it does?
I'll acknowledge that no belief system can be perfect, and I suppose that an extremist could hide under any belief, but those are outliers. There's a pattern to religious extremism. Just like there's a pattern to conservative extremism.
It doesn't just happen out of nowhere.
@@EmmaDilemma039 these terrorists don’t really care for Islam. They do these attacks to tell the west to stop their policy’s.
Hang on a minute...the Finsbury Park attacker is originally from Somerset, not Wales. But we don't see The Wurzels condemn him. What does that tell you?
It tells me The Wurzels isn't an ideology. Go figure.
Sargon says the Wales dude 'had his reasons' Can Carl just go away asap? That'd be great. Thanks
SHAUN IS THE ABSOLUTE BOY
REQUESTING SHAUN EAT A PRINGLE
it's the Jewish term for a non-Jewish person
upstageprism I believe it’s pronounced “shaun is best boy”
I'm Norwegian, and somewhat pro immigration. I'm not particularly pro massive Sunni Muslim immigration, and certainly not Wahhabi. Not just for the terrorism, but for the general values of these conservative forces, I see that about as damaging as having a bunch of American evangelists coming over. That being said, since I consider myself progressive, and since I often highlight the positive aspects of immigration, and in particular protecting and helping refugees - I get a lot of accusations from right-wingers online. They'll point out how I protect terrorism, and point out how destroyed my country has become due to violent Muslims.
Now remember, I mentioned I was Norwegian. You can google terror attacks that has happened in Norway the last ten years.
I am concerned with Wahhabi Islam and it's spawn of terrorism. But - call me crazy - somehow I am equally concerned with the alt-right and their spread of violent and hateful ideology, which often ends in terrorist attacks too. Meeting one conservative, violent ideology with another is about as moronic as shitting on your leg in order to remove piss stains.
Being progressive, seeing benefits of immigration, and wanting to help refugees does not automatically equal defending violent parts of Islam. Just because I am opposed to evangelical Christianity, other fundamentalist Christians, bigotry, racism, alt-right and far right doesn't automatically make me a supporter of radical Islam. I just do not believe one should meet hatred with hatred. I have faith in humanism and secularism being inherently good, and believe these ideas will spread naturally, with gentle encouragement. There's no need to react with fear when confronted with terrorism, and end up supporting the alt-right. Don't let fear control who you are as a person, or how our society is to function.
It's hard to be smart
Yeah, so many people don't understand that it isn't "the west" vs Islam, or whites vs [insert whichever ethnicity is being scaremongered about today] or even right vs left. It's people who want to make a better world because they're good people, vs the jackasses who'd tear it all down just to climb a few inches higher up the rubble and the thralls they've tricked into supporting them. The misconception is that the Neo-Nazis and the radical Islamists, for lack of a better word, are the opposing forces; they ain't. Right now they are *firm* allies, because they know that their actions will mutually benefit each other: neo-nazi terror attack in Christchurch -> Sri Lanka bombings -> whatever the Nazis do next, and so on. Oh and just to clarify: "allies" in the same sense that two or more vultures "work together" to devour a carcass: technically they aren't, but based on the effects, they might as well be.
@The Icon of Sin you realize other sects of islam aren't that conservative
Isn't most terror attacks in norway carried out by blackmetal atheists.
Or you guys done with that?
There was a video I saw of one of the terrorist groups who were mostly recruiting people for ISIS being followed around in England by a journalist group. The journalist knew what they were doing and reported on it in a documentary.
More over, literally in the middle of the documentary while this group walked to the street and were trying to recruiting people who really didn't seem all that interest in them for the most part another group of Muslim came along. The other group in the middle of hundreds of people called them out in broad daylight as being terrorists and did everything they could to let people know who these people were. They even tried to pick a fight with them to chase them off but the people who had the documentary done on them didn't seem to care at all.
Carl's little rant at 10:30 about how Muslim's don't call them out is the most asinine and dishonest interpretation of reality possible. These people call the crazies out all of the time but you can't just lock people up for being crazy. They have to have done something in front of cops that will get them locked up which most of them are smart enough to just wait for law enforcement to fuck off before going back to being a bunch of assholes.
Why is Shaun so smart?
Tastes good books
Valesto93 +
Valesto93 i heard his favorite book is ulysses a book nortoriously difficult to eat.
because he's a leftest
Someone has to take up that role, considering most of his UA-cam rivals refuse to.
@1:26 I find myself to be pretty far left on most issues and I didn't even realize what you said at 1:26 about the term moderate Muslim being loaded in such a way. You're right. The overton window has already been moved in terms of the way we talk about Muslims. I certainly won't be using that term anymore.
Kraut sees the video *screams internally in pain*
That man is going to go prematurely gray.
*burns his toast on purpose*
"IS THIS WHAT YOU FUCKING WANT SHAUN? IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT? IS THIS WHAT YOU WA-"
+Steven W
*burns some more books while using the image of someone who condemmed the burnings of books*
BURN KINDER BURN
Sherlock Smuug The thought of a German burning books sends shivers down my spine. That one happened before.
I just spend a couple of hours reading the comments on the #MoreThanARefugee video featured right now. It feels good to hear a sensible voice now.
I don't know what the hell UA-cam was on to think leaving the comments open on that video was a good idea, it completely defeats the purpose of it in the first place. Do they have that little understanding of their userbase?
It's not as if it even appeased that lot since half the comments are complaining about other comments being deleted and/or pre-emptively complaining about the comments being disabled anyway. They completely fill the comment section up with crap and *still* act like they're being suppressed; how sensitive are these people?
I can actually understand the outrage about the comments being deleted, because the amount of comments being deleted, including top comments, is absolutely insane, and it wasn't all swastikas and genocide calls. There are some guys at UA-cam who basically spend the last day deleting comments, non-stop, even comments answering to other comments to completely fuck up discussions. That's... not nice.
haha why would you do that to yourself
+Sherrypop Curtis I've been in search for someone that liked that video, too. You seem to imply that you liked UA-cams '#MoreThanARefugee' video. Could you explain why? To me, it seemed pure propaganda.
Mantis Toboggan First, how can refugees integrate if people like you continue to reject them?
Second, where is the proof that syrian refugees are creating ghettos? Paris and Manchester attack was not done by refugees LOL
Contrapoints and Shaun and Jen upload on the same day. Fuck yeah.
Emily Parker That's what I said!
"Do you denounce the actions of Osama bin Laden?"
Muslim Richard Spencer: "I'm not playing this game. Do you denounce George W. Bush? Do you denounce Bibi Netanyahu?"
Hahaha
BEST COMMENT
Why is tgis comment so underrated
This aged badly
I'm an atheist who likes nontoxic theists. Thank you for your video. I am very interested in building bridges between nontoxic atheists and nontoxic theists
Fortunately nontoxic people don't need much of a bridge between each other.
The amount of pure reason, respectful and calm discourse, acknowledgement of differing positions and meticulous, fact-based breakdown you are doing is absolutely amazing, Shaun.
Just recently, a right-wing guy sent out about eight bombs to different people. Are other right-wingers or conservatives in the USA condemning him? Possibly. But all I've been reading and hearing about is right wingers calling it a "conspiracy," false flag and etc. The same thing they do when a mass shooting happens. They don't seem to want to condemn anything BUT Islamic terrorism, even though seventy percent of the terrorism in the USA is being done right now by non-Islamic right-wing extremists.
By the way, Muslims tend to dislike the term "Moderate Muslims," because it implies that they are only moderately Muslim. They think of themselves as one hundred percent Muslim. But as for the terrorists, they don't call them Muslims, they call them "Islamists," which is not so much a religion as a political ideology.
And I must point out that "Islamism" is a right-wing ideology by any reasonable definition of the term, but more similar to right-wing Christian extremism than to liberalism.
The descriptions of a couple of these attacks reminded me very much of something that happened here in Toronto a few months ago, when a man drove a van onto the sidewalk, deliberately running people over, and killed about 18 people, I think. The man in question was not Muslim, he was an "incel." This similarity, combined with the notion that people--usually young men--can "self-radicalize" via the internet, make me suspect that these terror attacks may have little to do with Islam specifically and more to do with mental illness or whatever factors lead young men to feel angry and alienated in general. I have to wonder if these terrorists--if that word is even appropriate--may have ending up committing acts of violence whether Islam existed or not. I think it's likely that in at least some of the cases, religious ideology just formed a sort of seed around which personal and non-religious resentment and rage crystallized. Maybe part of our efforts to prevent terrorism should include a consideration of what leads men to become the sort of people who commit violence, regardless of what god they happen to worship.
Before watching: why should they have to say they condemn it? Why do these people assume they support it?
After watching: yeeep. Also #banwales? I'm kidding.
This video, single handedly changed me into a completely different person, so glad i have the guts to challenge my previous conceptions
That just shows you are easily manipulated
@@father042100+ comments and commenting on 7 year old videos I think you might be Shaun’s biggest fan
It did change my perspectives a lot.... While I still adhere to some of the views I had, the level of openness and nuance has been really beneficial in understanding different Societies.
I am genuinely scared for British Muslims. Please be safe everybody.
More so than the actual victims of terror attacks?
Would you like me to count the numbers of British Muslims affected by terror attacks vs the rest?
Your comments imply that they are under more threat than the rest of us
I would definitely say that they are considering the amount of Islamophobia there is in Britain. And yes, the majority of terror attacks are committed by right-wing individuals/groups
You believe that hateful words against Muslims are more harmful than Islamists actually killing and maiming people, including children? This alongside the hate preachers inciting violence and the multiple foiled terror plots against the UK public which definitely count as threats.
"And yes, the majority of terror attacks are committed by right-wing individuals/groups" If you consider Islamic terror right wing then certainly.
Jeremiah Fink Also, Muslims foiled the terror plots, and also Islamophobic hate crimes include violence, murders and terrorism. Stop pretending it's all bad words you dumbass.
This is why I love Shaun's videos; he makes Sargon seem even more idiotic than the last video.
#BANWALES
COMMENCE WEXIT
:( (Welsh lady)
" "Why don't Muslims fight against terrorism?"
City Center Dawah all around UK: Am i a joke to you?.
GG Allin
What, that doesn’t make sense at all, why are you blaming them for something that they didn’t do
@GG Allin No it doesn't you fucking idiot.
What's that? You didn't stop a terror attack that was in no way linked to you? How couldn't you do the police's job? You must have helped the bomber!
Your logic is flawed.
Great arguments, however Islam incorporated into the government in the Middle East is another entire discussion that could be explored in another video. Religious fundamentalism is terrifying.
"Ban whales? I thought you wanted to save the whales. Typical Leftist hypocrisy."
-- Teal Skull
The wine-whine merger is such a great thing.
20:52 seriously, thank you so much for pointing this out to people. Glad I’m not the only one who remembers this whenever these kinds of tragedies come to light. People always remember the terrorist, but almost never remember the victim.
>Insert Sargon casually assuming an entire mosque somewhere in England is radicalized and hasn't been exposed
"You can't stop terrorism" I wold actually expand on that Shaun to say: if somebody wants you dead bad enough they will find a way. We are never as secure as we think we are, be smart , be careful always
This video really could've been forty seconds long tbh, and just a montage of declarations by the British Council of Muslims et al denouncing terrorism, and also the London imams universally refusing to perform Islamic rites on the Borough Markets attackers.
yeah but then we don't get to hear Shauns voice for 4.716 Sargons.
Swear to god I saw this same video from Dick Coughlan 6-7 years ago in regards to Thunderf00t. I'm onto you Shaun. I've never seen you and Coughlan in the same room before. I WONDER WHY.
Shaun "The Dick"... uhhh... *Last Name*
Dnt Wry his last name is notCoughlan so conspiracy confirmed
The Dick and The Skull.
When people use the word "moderate" in the context of religion, they're referring to people who are only moderately religious, so a "moderate Muslim" could be extremely against t3rr0ri$m without any contradiction in terms.
Or at least, that's how I've heard it used. But I mostly hear it from atheist UA-camrs, and I know Shaun isn't into that scene, so maybe the way he's heard people use it gives it a different meaning to him.
Also, yes, ban Wales.
your the only youtuber of this flavour ive come across so far that isnt an islamaphobe, and i would like to thank you greatly for that
Thank you for spreading the reactions of Muslims on these events. I too was ignorant of this. Hopefully we can all realize that peace is better.
Meh, the problem isn't really that moderate muslims don't condemn terrorism, because it's obvious to anyone that is honest that they do in an individual and group basis. And it's not right to expect muslims to openly condemn every single attack (especially since there are a lot of them) in a manner that would generate more news than the attack itself, so the protests can be noticed. And the muslims should not be held accountable for the actions of a few that follow a similiar belief.
The problem really is when someone says that "islamic terrorism has nothing to do with islam". -When- -laws- -make- -it- -so- -that- -criticizing- -islam- -is- -more- -reprehensible- -than- -criticizing- -christianity- -or- -other- -religons- -(hey,- -canada! ).-
And this is why I generally like response videos (to prominent figures of a movement) more than this style of video, because this style of video usually adresses the low-hanging fruit conclusions one should easily be able to reach themselves. But I guess not everybody can, due to their eduction and social upbringing, so there is some value to this type of video I guess.
"When laws make it so that criticizing islam is more reprehensible than
criticizing christianity or other religons (hey, canada!)."
That's not what happened in Canada.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_103
It's not even a law, and it's not made anything "more reprehensible" than any other form of hate crime.
It's little more than wanting to fund a study on how to identify and reduce hate crime in general.
Islamophobia was entered in because we'd just suffered through the Quebec City Mosque shooting, and Stats Can reporting that hate crimes against Muslims had increased two-fold in a 3 year span.
But let's not contextualize motions with current events, or anything....
Except the motion was put forward before the Quebec shooting? It already included the word Islamophobia.
Can we also just ignore that the jewish population in canada is 1/3 that of muslims, but they suffer twice as many hate crimes?
It would also help if the motion bothered to define Islamophobia, which is used in many different contexts to label many different forms of speech. Counter Arguments has a video on this where he shows the word being used in those contexts.
I will admit that I was wrong about what the motion entails, I was misinformed by a source I trusted at the time. It's not nearly as serious as what my original comment entailed, though I still see issues with it.
No we can't ignore that jews suffer hate-crimes as a higher proportion as well. The motion doesn't do that. it about hate-crime. Though the rise in hate crimes against Muslims is what contextualized the motion to include Islamophobia. A two-fold increase in hate-crime in a 3 year span is still note worthy and alarming.
It was defined in the argumentation phase. 2 MPs were with you on that, Rona Ambrose, and Lisa Raitt
"Use of term Islamophobia Rona Ambrose and Lisa Raitt criticized the motion for its use of the term Islamophobia, which they described as "controversial".[9][17] Many Conservative MPs said that the Liberals needed to define Islamophobia.[20]
On February 15, Iqra Khalid stated that the definition of
Islamophobia is "the irrational hate of Muslims that leads to
discrimination".[21]
I understand that their are issues with it, and I agree to an extent that a more neutral terming of the motion would have been better received by the public, that was proposed as well, and it failed even though every party that wasn't the liberals voted for it (Because let's not allow our MPs to represent their constituents, but force them to vote along party lines.) But honestly I'm not too flustered by it.
Thanks for being reasonable, I've seen a lot of my fellow Canadians literally call this the first steps of sharia law being imposed by the government upon Canada, and it's just like... seriously guys?
"because this style of video usually adresses the low-hanging fruit conclusions one should easily be able to reach themselves."
But the problem is that many people DON'T easily reach that conclusion. If there wasn't so much of it then perhaps this style of video wouldn't be necessary?
El Aquapimp is it possible to criticize any ideology without violence? Tell a cowboys fan that the Dallas cowboys suck I guarantee you that you will be ok afterwards.
I think another reason why we don't hear some moderate muslims condemn these attacks could be because some of these muslims have fled from countries where radical islam has a stranglehold... and we all know what they do with "moderate" muslims over in those countries...
Today I learned that I am a little bit loved by a UA-cam star. This is very good news.
In the immediate aftermath of the Manchester bombing, a Change.org petition became somewhat popular in my Facebook news feed which called for the immediate arrest/deportation of anyone currently on the terrorism watchlist. Both my older sister and I took serious issue with this as the watchlist, to the best of my knowledge, mostly contains the details of people who *might* do something in the future, but who hasn't yet been found to be planning something to that effect. It should also be noted that the Change.org profile picture of the person who made the petition was the image of a Union Flag with the words "Vote Leave" emblazoned across the central stripe - given the nature of the petition, I began to suspect that Islamophobia masquerading as a security measure was the reason behind its creation, because Lord knows there were definitely some people who voted for Brexit for reasons which can only be described as isolationist, nationalist and xenophobic.
When I voiced my concerns, I was met with not only the assumption that everyone on the terrorism watchlist had been convicted of terrorism in the past, and the inevitable mention of Islam being an "inherently violent" ideology, but also that by suggesting people who haven't done anything yet should be arrested, I was a terrorist sympathizer. That actually got to me.
I proceeded to make a lengthy post about how these kinds of events can create a particularly hysterical narrative that distorts itself very quickly and has the potential to leave a trail of devastation in its wake, not only persecuting the primary targets of the flashpoint, but anyone who is suspected of harbouring sympathy with this "other" people and/or their cause - a narrative we have seen play out in the form of the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, the tribulations of Nazi Germany, the McCarthy Witch Hunts and so on. I also mentioned that this narrative had two likely endings - the destruction of civil liberties in the name of security, or attempted genocide.
I feel that, as we continue to see terrorist attacks carried out across the world, it should be extremely important to remind everyone that terrorism is a parasitic ideology that co-opts other causes, regardless of that original cause's social acceptance and/or viability - as seen both with Muslim terrorists mindlessly killing innocent people, or far-right nutters who strike down innocent Muslims as some ludicrous act of revenge. I feel it is more evident than ever that threatening extreme measures to combat extremism only adds fuel to the proverbial fire.
But they're brown,,!,!,!,?!.?.
Violence and Islam: Conversations with Houria Abdelouahedrealy good book written by an Arab man and an Iranian.Check it out
I've got a shitload of dishes just sitting around, where are the Moderate Muslims condemning that in public???
as a muslim woman, i thank you for this video. specifically, i hate the phrase "moderate muslim" because it implies that all muslims are inherently violent to begin with, and that islam is a monolith with no two muslims holding different beliefs or different interpretations of islam. white people, men, christians, (insert x privileged group in america), etc. are never called upon or forced to defend their entire religion, gender, or race whenever someone in that group commits a violent act. but marginalized people are always somehow responsible for commenting on or condemning every fucking thing one person does despite the fact but the acts of that one person already conform to the views held by the oppressed group. me telling my high school history teacher that no, my people and my family did not in fact ~do 9/11~ (which yes, actually happened) isn't going to suddenly make him believe that "hey muslims are okay i guess!" it's not anyone marginalized person's responsibility to educate someone or defend their existence to someone, especially when all that person clearly wants to do is use whatever response they get as a strawman.
I wonder how many members of his audience carl has dobbed into the police for the dangerous far right ideologies they definitely hold
i am honestly thinking about creating more youtube accounts in order to upvote this video more often
I think my favourite type of response to the questions you ask on Twitter are the people who are all "deport all Muslims", but then get stumped when you ask where to deport them to or what to do if they don't want to leave. They never have any answer to that, except "who cares, just do it" or words to that effect.
Well it doesnt matter because their starting point is wrong - islam. Whether they are moderate or not.
Stefkostov
Exactly.
If Muslims were sincere they would leave Islam instead of defending it whrn their murderous ideology sanctions violence.
Stefkostov
watch out, the braidead apologists of Islam will call you a " Jizzlamophobe" for stating the truth, or racist, as if Islam were a race.
If they aren't radical/ hurting people, then what makes it worse than Christianity?
A lot of them seem to have reached a pretty damn good end point. You started out as an illiterate, incoherent, wailing, totally dependent sack of flesh freshly popped from a vagina, but that doesn't make you a bad person. People are not starting points. Judging them as such makes you a fool.
Christianity is openly pro-war......
"Do not suppose that I (Jesus) have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn “a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law- a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.”
You know, in regards to the moderate-radical dichotomy, I have some interesting tidbit for you. I am an Alevi, which for outsiders is this weird syncretic religion that they can't really label, but has probably something to do with Shia Islam. Now, mainstream Twelver Shias kind of begrudgingly accept us as Muslims, be it insofar they label us as "ghulat", which means extremists. Why? Is it because Alevis are puritan sectarians with a hostile outlook on society? On the contrary, Alevis are completely benign, if not docile. Rather, they call us extremists because we like Hz. Ali a bit too much even for them; they think that our heterodoxy is a little bit too extreme for them.
So in short I understand why you take issue with the moderate-extremist dichotomy.
in Turkey, Alevis' rights and leftism generally goes hand in hand. Fun footnote.
Hey Shaun, you could have also mentioned how Islamic clerical groups have been condemning this stuff since 2001 (easy to google), and that we already handed the Tories their surveillance state with the IP Bill passing in November 2016. Edward Snowden: “The UK has just legalised the most extreme surveillance in the history of western democracy. It goes further than many autocracies.”
Tbf, there is so much historical and political context that you could have gone into with this that you've done a commendable job in keeping it this focused. Can't help but feel the topic needs a branching series of videos though. Any takers?
I remember seeing families on TV, talk about their radicalised children. Out of five I've seen, two were white, coming from upper class catholic families, born in France.
People have to understand that radicalisation can touch anyone from any background. A second of weakness is enough for them to get you.
Well you need to understand that for some wierd reason people radicalize in the name of islam much more often than for any other reason in the world.
Harry Styles Are you sure you even read what I wrote? Could you point me to the part where I say they didn't?
My point was that banning Muslims from entering the country would never stop terrorism because the people they brainwash into becoming extremists are already in the country and most of the time they are of French nationality and have been for generations.
Had you banned the entire religion from the very beginning, it would still be the same because they would have always found a way to get someone. *Just like they do now.*
You could have tried to understand before hopping on your high horse.
well i liked reading that until the argumentum ad hominem.
Good man Shaun. Let's all strive to find the truth. As complicated as it all is, because holy hell is it ever nearly unfathomably complicated, the constant checks and balancing of the two sides is how to do it
You dont have to stop immigration to combat Islam. You need to get rid of LIBERALISM and have a culture that has CONFIDENCE. that gives and requires something that people must ASSIMILATE too. Something that has strong values such as humanism, egalitarianism, atheism, and solidarity
what makes atheism a strong value?
@@FinnbarrGoesFast
Dude advocates for a communist dictatorship, what do you think he will say lol
Where are the moderate Welshmen condemning this attack? It's been years, and I've never had any examples spoonfed to me.
Fantastic video as usual Shaun. While I agree with you entirely on the vast majority of the video I do take issue with the argument you used against a travel ban. Just to clarify, I'm an entirely against the idea of a Muslim travel ban, I just think the particular argument you used of "well terrorists break laws and murder people so I don't think they'd object to breaking immigration laws" is a pretty bad one; the obvious parallels in America's gun control debate should be kinda obvious, and I think we can both agree that it doesn't hold much weight in either debate.
There are plenty of good reasons to oppose a Muslim travel ban (you touched on several others throughout the video) but I think that particular one is specious.
Ed B ur right, that was the only flaw in an otherwise excellent video.
Hey man, you really went to far with this one. I live in Germany and Kraut and Tea is shouting so loud, everyone in the country can now hear it. ^^
Lifelover992011 Woke me up this morning, actually -.-
There's no such thing as a moderate Muslim.. There are only Muslims..
John Walker All Muslims are the same...like all Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and Neo Pagans.
Your videos have been enlightening. Thank you!
Shaun you're restoring my faith in British people single-handedly
I'm an atheist, and I am really not a fan of religion of any kind.
But before I saw this video and read through many of the links here, and others I have found, I suppose you could have classed me as one of those who would have asked "Why don't moderate Muslims condemn terror attacks?" out of ignorance.
Thank you for your content. I very much appreciate the work you do.
Talk about the recent videos by Sargon and TL;DR. Just absolutely hateful rhetoric.
The telling thing about the Osbourne incident is that the culprit survived. If someone drove a van into a crowd I was standing in, killing and wounding at randomn, and the crowd caught him, I'm not sure that I'd show the level of restraint required to simply detain him until the police arrived. Many crowds would have beaten him to death, instead, within sight of their injured loved ones, these people decided to obey the law.
I know this is a few years old, but did anyone ever get around to banning whales? I'm not sure what people have against sea dwelling creatures, but I'm sure they have their reasons.
Asymmetrical warfare is incredibly hard to combat and incredibly effective for those engaging in it, that's why they do it....It doesn't take a whole lot of planning to rent a large vehicle and plow into a crowd of people.
The kind of person who demands that all Muslims answer for the actions of another will become indignant when it's pointed out to them the crimes committed by their country or people who share their ethnicity.
I'm really glad these videos exist because I know that I have believed some of the things you argue against/disprove out of ignorance or disinterest, and without these videos I probably wouldn't have changed my mind. I just want to say thank you and keep up the good work.
Thanks for your video
It’s topical for us in New Zealand right now
Hate begets hate no matter what
I find it dishonest to reject ideas presented to reduce terrorism by noting that they will not eliminate terrorism. If the goal is to *reduce* terrorism, then whether said idea eliminate terrorism or not is a red herring. The relevant question is whether they would actually reduce terrorism.
Papa is back
There is literally only one single mosque in all of Europe that allows homosexuality
Your definition of moderate is different to theirs. For them, moderate is following the rules of democracy and religious toleration. Going further than that like homosexuality is a no-no.
First of all, im obssed with your channel watching every single video from the start since i descovered it lest week haha... About the topic video, its honestly so ridiculous how other religions are generalized but when it happens to theirs its just a "isolated incident", give me a break. This happens a lot here in Brazil with religions that steem from African roots. Anyways, great video as always!
I don’t get the people asking these questions. Comparing isis, or the taliban to the rest of Islam is like comparing the nazis to the rest of Christianity. Yeah technically they are the same, but one is so mangled and distorted from the source it may aswell be it’s own religion.
not really sure these can really be compared, as far as I know, hitler did not do the holocosts or any of his other mass killings to support christians goals nor do I think they actively pretended that they did these things to protect christianity or something like that, and I don't think they claimed to invade poland/denmark/norway/france in order to help the christian agenda. In fact I believe that the pope denounced nazi germany a number of time.
if you compare that to isis, who's litterally all about promoting a better islam and who litterally as "islamic" as part of its name... it's really not the same
"Why don't moderate Muslims condemn terror attacks?" Why don't you listen to them (when they do)?
What do these people expect, an hourly segment on Fox listing the latest condemnations of terror and displays of support for victims from Muslim individuals and communities? Self-awareness must be much harder than it seems if people are wondering why they don't see things at which they refuse to look.
my main main shaun back in buisness again wew. I wonder if Kraut will cry about this one
Kraut's current video is called "the failure of the moderate Muslim" or something like that. So he already whined about it in advance, kinda.