Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Islam and Conservative Rhetoric
Podly
RUDEASSTITTIES Registered User regular
RUDEASSTITTIES Registered User regular
One of the biggest shortcomings of the Republican party is the inconsistency of their rhetoric. It is well documented --- the Daily Show is practically nourished off it -- and well known by most on this more-or-less liberal board. But one rhetorical inconstancy I haven't seen brought up much is the short circuit between
"America is the freest, best, greatest country god has ever created"
and
"We can't build a mosque because they will brainwash our youth!"
If America is the best country, then why should we fear competing ideologies? It is very at-the-moment with the NYC Islamic center, but it's always popping up, be it building a mosque in a Christian town or distributing korans in prisons. Why is the rhetoric successful? Does it have to do with a certain Christian strain that exists in our social consciousness, that humans are inherently evil, or, at the very least, extremely susceptible to wickedness? Or is it (to hark back to Deleuze) that society makes us yearn for discipline and control, and that Islam is thereby more of a powerful ideology?
Any way I try to analyze it, it always makes my brain melt. There's so many pitfalls in the arrangement that I can't even understand how it works beyond a visceral idiocy. While that may be the main thrust of much Republican rhetoric, this specific instance seems to be propagated at all levels of public discourse. Why?
"America is the freest, best, greatest country god has ever created"
and
"We can't build a mosque because they will brainwash our youth!"
If America is the best country, then why should we fear competing ideologies? It is very at-the-moment with the NYC Islamic center, but it's always popping up, be it building a mosque in a Christian town or distributing korans in prisons. Why is the rhetoric successful? Does it have to do with a certain Christian strain that exists in our social consciousness, that humans are inherently evil, or, at the very least, extremely susceptible to wickedness? Or is it (to hark back to Deleuze) that society makes us yearn for discipline and control, and that Islam is thereby more of a powerful ideology?
Any way I try to analyze it, it always makes my brain melt. There's so many pitfalls in the arrangement that I can't even understand how it works beyond a visceral idiocy. While that may be the main thrust of much Republican rhetoric, this specific instance seems to be propagated at all levels of public discourse. Why?
Podly on
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
I can guarantee that Sean Hannity hasn't read any Deleuze.
Fixed.
*For varying qualities of 'you' depending on the age. See:
In any case, what's going on right now vis a vis Islam/Muslims and the right's rhetoric is pretty standard focusing on a supposedly malevolent Other during a time of socioeconomic stress.
Which is why I went with those instead of one of the litany of other examples of American majoritarian bigotry towards some random minority who dared to actually enjoy their rights and live here. The bastards.
Thus: Muslims and Latinos.
What can be said is that this particular imam perceives Islam in completely contradictory terms to cave dwellers of Afghanistan. To a lot of public head conservatives this is irrelevant, what's relevant is how hateful they can convince us he is, and how awesome we'll think they are for doing that.
The republican party is actually on the pulse of the nation with this one. So then we have the question of, well are we are a representative democracy or aren't we?
Poll numbers vary, but I've seen 70% opposed numbers. Democrats fighting for seats are not going to win by backing this. What is the democratic response here? It's not politically correct? PC is a notion long since scorned. You don't win hearts and minds with that.
"There is not a man of us who does not at times need a helping hand to be stretched out to him, and then shame upon him who will not stretch out the helping hand to his brother."
It happens when times are good as well, though. It's just the conservative/right/Republican Party's selective support of democracy. When they win everything is awesome and there is a mandate to govern as a national leader to whom opposition is the height of an irresponsible lack of patriotism. When they lose all those patriotic symbols are symbols of tyranny and the Constitution totally lets them tell that divisive coastal leader, who managed to steal the White House from the more deserving candidate who hails from the heartland, to go fuck himself.
Which wouldn't be a big deal, everyone hates losing after all, if it weren't for the fact that most major outlets and persons of power seem to have drank the kool aid. Thus any election result is a clear clarion call to govern from the 'center-right.'
Minority rights aren't determined by majority rule.
And 'political correctness'? Really?
Really.
A lot of people see this as pissing on the ashes. Telling them they're bad people for thinking it isn't going to win any elections... quite the reverse.
"There is not a man of us who does not at times need a helping hand to be stretched out to him, and then shame upon him who will not stretch out the helping hand to his brother."
The rhetoric is successful because the people who listen the Right's arguments don't know anything about Muslims beyond the negative headlines they're getting these days. I believe this because I don't know anything about Muslims beyond the headlines. I know bits and pieces about the religion but next to nothing about the people living now.
The argument from Democrats who are you know, not cowardly pansies (all four of them):
Applied to the states and local governments by the 14th Amendment. Hooray!
And moniker gives you the last bit of the argument.
We are not. We are a Constitutional Republic, which means the will of the majority is limited to protect the rights of the minority.
And the idea that you are only doing the right thing to win hearts and minds is an attitude that's wrong-headed and rotten to its heart.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
It will dissipate. Islamic bigotry was at a lower level in 2002 and 2003 than it is today. In part that is due to economic uncertainty bringing out nativist sentiments an in part it's due to political elites spewing hateful bullshit. One of the few credits that Bush the Lesser has is that he recognized you don't make this into a civilizational fight between 'the West' and 'Islam' (particularly since al qaeda does not speak for Islam) but Gingrich &co. seem more interested in stoking those fires and making that false equivalency for a few more votes. Which is all the more shameful.
Well, if you want to get really cynical, they realize that their best way to get back in power is to make the threat seem oversized. So make the threat bigger!
Of course, I think Newt & Co. aren't smart enough to do that, but still.
The republicans don't have their hand on the pulse of the nation. It's more like they gave the naton an adrenaline shot by calling it the "Ground Zero Mosque" when it is nether a mosque or on ground zero and then said "See! I told you this was a serious issue!"
And holding to your principles, except when it's difficult, is the height of cowardice. The fact that you see this as 'political correctness' (and I can only assume what you actually mean by that) is just about the saddest thing I've read all day.
The whole "real America" narrative always goes back to that. If you're not white, not suburban, not Christian you're a guest here nothing more
mealy mouthed fucks
If by fundies, you mean Republicans, yes. Traditionally fundies are a tool of the GOP, though they were a dog wagging tail from the time Clinton won the budget standoff to Schaivo. Now they're back to being marginalized (note the GOP response to the Prop 8 ruling).
It's right there. It was a part of the event. So let's dispel that "2 blocks is 2 miles in New York!" schtick.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion/09mosque.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss
"There is not a man of us who does not at times need a helping hand to be stretched out to him, and then shame upon him who will not stretch out the helping hand to his brother."
And?
I breathed in a fair amount of the smoke
am I a national landmark too?
The first thing people like to say is that the building site isn't technically IN THE FOUNDATION of the WTC.
As if that's important to the discussion. It isn't.
"There is not a man of us who does not at times need a helping hand to be stretched out to him, and then shame upon him who will not stretch out the helping hand to his brother."
Some of that smoke you inhaled may have come from one of the hijackers and thus you are now a super secret terrorist who may explode at any moment. The sad thing is you don't even know it.
discount shoe store, a burgerking that overlooks the fucking site, a strip joint, etc etc
It isn't in the World Trade Center Complex, but even if it were that doesn't make an ounce of difference. Unless you also make the false conflation of Islam, a religion with 1 billion members, with Al Qaeda, a terrorist group with a few hundred adherents who go around murdering Muslims and anybody else in the name of Islam without any right or mandate to do so. Since the two are not in fact the same what difference does it make if an actual mosque, rather than community center, were incorporated into Liebeskind's design for the new tower?
Would it make a difference if there was a sign with golden lettering spelling out "Victory!" in Arabic?
"There is not a man of us who does not at times need a helping hand to be stretched out to him, and then shame upon him who will not stretch out the helping hand to his brother."
I ran out of lime so I just highlighted the most important part.
I don't even understand the attempt you are making at a point here, let alone if one actually exists. I'm going to go ahead and give you the assumption of having one, so please explain.
Feel free to use either the new #1 WTC site or the sacred Burlington Coat Factory here.
Liberal editorials said the same thing a year ago when some were bringing loaded, holstered firearms to Obama's town hall meetings. What was the Right's response to that argument?
I'm more interested in how, exactly, republicans, or anyone for that matter, islam could brainwash the youth of the single greatest, freest, best country on God's earth.
tolerant person n. One who doesn't have his/her interests perceived as threatened by a different group/culture
Because of their innocence. The best, greatest, freest innocence of any youths ever.