Islam, latest target of boutique intellectual metacorruption

[Aristocles]

As politics are mostly a false front for distorted manipulation, the storied history of such hornswoggling is documented throughout recorded history. From this, the actual truth of social matters are understood to in turn be distorted. A reflection on Islam could more readily improve clarity of current mainstream views.

I would like to challenge some seeming conspiracies from transcending beyond the hunches for which they are sprouting.

Scapegoats are a typical ploy for greater underhandedness. As this political technique has become rather refined over the storied history of humanity, I want a more accurate view how the corruption may be occurring today. It is understood this often requires a look at history.

As it stands, I see muslims being the latest fear target, and I want to look at the less emphasized "other side." I want to hear more of the alternative, the more philosophical view in Islam's defense. (It is true this could fit under RELIGION, ETHICS, etc, but I think the philosophical aspect of the "political" history needs to be clearer first. There is an informative post titled ISLAM for religion clarity. I also think it is highly unlikely any muslim views will be proportionately close to reality on this forum, so any efforts at clarity are much appreciated).

I am seeing the "War on Terror," 911, Taliban, ISIL, getting entirely too much attention misdirected at Islam in general. It is true, beheadings are dramatic and bad. It is true, muslim countries, in general, appear to dislike much of what more liberal countries represent. The media paints the picture that sells. The truth is harder to glean.

In deliberate staunch defiance to popular culture I will try to defend Islam as more humane than many of its antagonists advertise. In so doing, my philosophical position will reference the pattern of those labeled jew, mulsim, pagan, christian, sikh, negro, white, woman, old, poor, homosexual, invalid, untouchable, androgynous, homeless, mentally ill, indigenously tribal, young, affluent, etc. My primary argument is the political attack of Islam is mostly from Islam not ceding "rights to corporations," bearing similarity to Marxist communism.

Islam is under attack as John/Robert Kennedy, Ngo Dinh Diem, Mohammad Mosaddegh, Che Guevara and Martin Luther King Junior were under attack for similarly covert reasons. The intensity of problems in the Middle East has an association. Africans were commoditized by the wealthy and often appear to be hated as many adapt and overcome. Women have been materialized from the world's oldest profession. Indigenous tribes are rarely treated well when introduced by looting newcomers. Apparent differences come with a price. The just being 'human nature" position requires some philosophy before such seeming terminal dismissal. There appears to be a clear political agenda, most notable from the industrial revolution where Robber barons learned to profit exponentially from the seemingly inevitable wars, even stoke the flames to a very high degree as technology has been so significantly enhanced.

Before recorded history, I do not imagine such rapid decisions measuring intellectual good versus bad, pleasure and pain, existed in such sheer quantity. The lifespans of humans and intensity for which we generally attach to institutions are hard to delineate. The mere mention of conspiracy appears to be disregarded for simple mention of the word conspiracy. Perhaps posters can add clarity. Any constructive philosophical attempts are appreciated.

Here is an article with detailed perspective, albeit radically different than popular culture advertises.... https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/joa ... isorder-2/ This is not my view, but something to get the philosophical cogs turning further on the subject.

[Granth]

Mmmm. So should we embrace Islam as our political system given all your research?

[Aristocles]

Mmmm. So should we embrace Islam as our political system given all your research?

If I were Sikh, named after the supreme Guru, then I would be more hesitant than most to 'embrace" as mentioned, considering Britain cut Punjab just prior to vacating, leaving less for those that appeared to fight for it most. However, this post was not intended to call Islam a political system. It was more so done to philosophically clarify mainstream views regarding Islam.

Please read the bolded part in the post to maintain the spirit of the discussion.

[Granth]

Mmmm. So should we embrace Islam as our political system given all your research?

If I were Sikh, named after the supreme Guru, then I would be more hesitant than most to 'embrace" as mentioned, considering Britain cut Punjab just prior to vacating, leaving less for those that appeared to fight for it most. However, this post was not intended to call Islam a political system. It was more so done to philosophically clarify mainstream views regarding Islam.

Please read the bolded part in the post to maintain the spirit of the discussion.

I didn't ask a Sikh. Anyway it seems to be I that is calling Islam a political system, which I have no problem with, and yes I did read the bolded part of your post where it implies a political view.

In your view is Islam a system of any kind?

[Aristocles]

I am thinking Islam is a religion, and yes I consider that a system/institution. As such, it would have deep ties to other institutions, especially in areas of the world aspiring to be governed according to interpretations of the religion.

Was my bolded portion confusing? I wanted to suggest Islam is a threat to capitalism in a similar fashion for which Marxism appears a threat. I would imagine Islam intellectuals could argue no government system exists as Islam prescribes. Likewise, that appears to be the case with Marxism.

[Granth]

I am thinking Islam is a religion, and yes I consider that a system/institution. As such, it would have deep ties to other institutions, especially in areas of the world aspiring to be governed according to interpretations of the religion.

Was my bolded portion confusing? I wanted to suggest Islam is a threat to capitalism in a similar fashion for which Marxism appears a threat. I would imagine Islam intellectuals could argue no government system exists as Islam prescribes. Likewise, that appears to be the case with Marxism.

So I guess we agree then that a religious system that aspires to govern must therefore be a political system, the reason why a Western aspiration has been to separate church from state (not always or even barely successful lately, I admit).

I think if Islam was merely a threat to capitalist ideology it would be a far lessor problem than it is as a threat to gender equality and therefore social freedom generally. Islam is a pox on social freedom. Islamic ideology certainly isn't any better than capitalist ideology. After all it seems to want all of capitalists resources and to make even Western females it's whores, servants and sex slaves. There isn't even an Islamic glass ceiling for females to look through yet alone aspire,conspire and strategize toward a breakthrough.

[Aristocles]

There is some agreemnet Granth in Islam especially blurring lines/definitions of religion and politics.

I do not agree Islam itself maintains the extreme stance toward women and intercourse that you mention, albeit the stance is extreme in other ways. I do see the ancient concepts as unfair and outdated. The dramatic footage and court cases publicized appear more reflective of the primitive nature of the social wherewithal, one for which I think the religion was trying to address when religious doctine was proclaimed.

I do not proclaim Islam is merely a threat to capitalism. My position is there are a great deal of efforts to undercut it because it is rigorous (much like Catholicism) and particularly threatening to "Western" business. It is a threat to the big business of capitalism. The history of oil leases, contracts, etc. illustrate this well.

[Granth]

There is some agreemnet Granth in Islam especially blurring lines/definitions of religion and politics.

I do not agree Islam itself maintains the extreme stance toward women and intercourse that you mention, albeit the stance is extreme in other ways. I do see the ancient concepts as unfair and outdated. The dramatic footage and court cases publicized appear more reflective of the primitive nature of the social wherewithal, one for which I think the religion was trying to address when religious doctine was proclaimed.

I do not proclaim Islam is merely a threat to capitalism. My position is there are a great deal of efforts to undercut it because it is rigorous (much like Catholicism) and particularly threatening to "Western" business. It is a threat to the big business of capitalism. The history of oil leases, contracts, etc. illustrate this well.

Still, I think an Islamic elite will want to claim control of those 'Western business' things for the same egoic reasons as any Western ego and use and control them to maintain a personal comfort level of extreme extravagance while pleasuring themselves at the sight of horrors not particularly dissimilar to the pleasures your average psychopath enjoys. After all, what is a better example of a 'civilized' Islamic elitist businessman than a Sheikh of an oil-rich sheikdom? I read recently of a prince of such a sheikdom criticizing any Western nation who shows hesitancy in allowing a full-scale open-door policy with regard to Muslim refugee Syrian migrants while his own country maintains strict border control and zero entry policy for same refugees even though only one geographic border separates them.

[Aristocles]

Yes Granth, again we have agreement, & Saudi Arabia is the first place I think of in that regard. The Saudi elite I believe to be more representative of capitalism than Islam. Further, we ask why that is and what is the connection to the individuals I mention in the first post? Saudi Arabian elite, appointed through Westen influence capitalize on the Holy Land of Muslims. They do not appear to make good representatives of the religion or the politics.

Saudi Arabia, like Mexico has a rather homogeneous religion population, both religions are rather resilient in maintaining religious traditions. Few countries, beside Pakistan, are more blatantly corrupt, but I think we must be quick not to generalize to the majority of the population in those countries. The extremes of poverty and wealth may be associated with the rigor to traditional beliefs, even an association with lack of formal education, but those that prey on the masses, be it illicit drug cartels or mind controlling religious dogma, appear to be less globally influencial than the less obvious agenda of the most powerful intellegence agencies. In this case, it appear Islam is an excuse for bigger crimes upon the masses.

[Scribbler60]

I think that before one can truly comment on this, one has to bear in mind that Islam, like Christianity and Taoism and Buddhism and Judaism and pretty much every other myth generated by the human race, is not a monolithic enterprise. At its most fundamental, Islam is divided into Sunni and Shi'ite sects, and then further subdivided into countless other fragments, all of which claim to be the keepers of the full and final word of Allah.

The Islamic faith practiced by, say, Irshad Manji, is light-years away from the Islam preached by Anjem Choudary, just as the inclusive Catholicism of Stephen Colbert is a far, far cry from the hate-faith espoused by Bill Donohue.

[Aristocles]

Scribbler60

I think you are describing the more political nature of the religions, & appropriately so here on the political thread. I do think philosophically, there are important concepts addressed by Islam that have stood the test of time and all followers agree, many non-muslims also...

[Scribbler60]

Scribbler60

I think you are describing the more political nature of the religions, & appropriately so here on the political thread. I do think philosophically, there are important concepts addressed by Islam that have stood the test of time and all followers agree, many non-muslims also...

Which concepts, specifically? That the sun revolves around the earth? That the taking of numerous wives, including ones under age, is somehow acceptable? That apostates are to be beheaded? That salt water and fresh water do not mix? That the Qu'ran is the full and final word of Allah and his prophet?

Herein lies the issue with all these man-made concepts, the issue that I was trying to address earlier: Islam is not monolithic. The numerous sects of the faith reflect the prejudices and biases of its human creators, just as all religions do. There are extremist nutcases, moderates, liberals and apostates, all of which have their own version of their faith and all of which think that they and they alone have the truth.

Please bear in mind that I agree these things are worth discussing, but I also think that before any meaningful dialogue can take place, we first have to properly define our terms and be open about our prejudices. My bias comes from the understanding that fundamentalist Islam is no longer a religious force but primarily a political one, much like Christianity has been warped as a political tool in much of the United States.

[Aristocles]

Scribbler60

I think you and Granth make good points about the political aspects of Islam. I am not trying to be an expert on Arabic much less Islam, but I do want to be philosophically consistent with my bolded part in the original post.

To better address your question, I focus on what I see as the focus of Islam, namely god (of course referred to as Allah). There are hundreds of words describing the abstract concept and the primary tenet of not worshipping false idols is significant. Looking at other religions, one finds a lesser appreciation of god in my opinion. Yes, I agree muslim views can easily become obsessive and dissociate one from one's self. However, greater dialogue on the concept can be helpful and more appropriate in another context. A look at how humans practically worship lesser notions is rather interesting, but still less the point of my post.

A look at George W Bush versus Jimmy Carter in relation to Christian beliefs may get closer to the overemphasis of Islam in mainstream views that I am trying to emphasize....

-- Updated March 23rd, 2016, 4:44 pm to add the following --

Not calling you a prophet Scribbler, but this author appears to now address the clarity, you previously mention on the topic, well:

com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

(As we address US presidential elections on other forum topics, the potential candidates may tip the scales of catastrophic clashes, consistent with Marxist predictions).

-- Updated March 23rd, 2016, 5:02 pm to add the following --

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... ts/384980/