Stellar article, containing many of the reasons why the rest of the world couldn’t care less about the Trump hysteria of the american press, let alone the Russia one. The complete refusal of the so-called american political left to face the realities of interventionist policies of both republican AND democratic presidents alike, directly caused the loss of the candidate whose only promise was ‘more of the same’. As long as this doesn’t change, the american people will vote for whichever goon promises them something else.
Those of us in the rest of the world can only watch in utter amazement how a once great country tears itself and the world apart in a nasty swirl of political opportunism, corporate interests and religious insanity no better than that of many third world nations.
Challenging racism by posing that 'white people are privileged yet complacent, and refuse to listen' might not have the intended effect.
In the midst of all this, the western left stands flabbergasted at the far-right pushback against this sort of parlance.
For those of us in the middle it's a sad show; bigots on both sides with no end in sight.
North Korea very much carries weight in military world affairs, as it plays a pivotal role as buffer state between China and US best ally S-Korea. China does NOT want a US-allied reunified Korea at its borders. Already they are quite displeased with US air defense batteries protecting S-Korea from missile attacks.
The nuclear proliferation of the Kim regime is also making Japan quite nervous, which could entice them to go nuclear themselves; another scenario China absolutely does not want to see unfold.
Add the thousands of artillery rounds that will land on Seoul in any major conflict between N-Korea and whomever, and you have a country that punches well above its weight in international affairs, both politically and yes, militarily.
The US could defeat North Korea in a day, literally. But that would mean thousands of casualties on both sides of the border, and a refugee problem the likes of which the world has rarely seen. Again, China does not want to absorb a couple million undereducated, malnutrioned Koreans.
The only solution that benefits everyone (except the North Korean people) is the status quo, which with Kim's ambition is becoming (or indeed has become) untenable.
There is no good solution, only variations of bad ones. The can has been kicked down the road by at least half a dozen US presidents, and it's special ed tantrum child 45 that will have to choose which path to go down next.
The tentacles of religion are once again doing what they do best; strangling the life out of anything or anyone that dares oppose its simpleton mix of fantasy and reality.
It's an utter shame we are only allowed to point to bombs and violence as the dangerous 'extremist element' of religion, while major parts of the world being indoctrinated into lunacy on a daily basis doesn't register as a problem at all.
This wilful ignorance is and will be the cause of countless times the suffering all the IEDs in the world could ever hope to inflict.
Stating that 'wearers of burkinis are harking back to early days of the Third Republic' is like saying that slave traders are harking back to the early days of the United States.
Regardless of the subject, just because a certain behaviour has precedent does not lend it any legimacy, nor does it mean that it's either wanted or beneficial. Pertinent to the covering of one's body, it is exactly because France has left this culture behind that backlash against the burkini is so fierce.
That being said, most of us Europeans are very much in favor of freedom of dress, that is very few people feel that we should ban the wearing of any clothing bar those that inhibit normal human interaction such as veils and balaclavas.
However, the burkini is such a symbolic case because it confronts people with the fact that having finally managed to break free from their own religion (catholicism), here comes a whole new group of people who want nothing of the sort, in fact quite the opposite.
I must say that the smoking analogy in this article is pretty spot on. Imagine a smoker lighting a cigarette in a crowded restaurant's garden, or a mother smoking while driving her children to school. None of these are illegal, yet the average reaction closely mirrors the sentiment that is felt towards overt manifestations of religion. And in Europe's case that religion happens to be Islam.
For me, if a woman wants to wear a symbol of a patriarchal system of oppression as a form of piety, I completely respect her right to choose. But that doesn't mean I have respect her choice, or the system that it represents.
A secular society is the only way to truly garantuee freedom of religion. In fact, the U.S. Constitution doesn't mention god or gods anywhere, and guarantees Freedom of Religion (which definitely includes freedom from religion) in The Bill of Rights.
It is, in essence, a godless constitution and you should be proud of that.
I also don't see why you seem to think you disagree with me in saying that indigenous people should be allowed to wear traditional clothing, since that is my viewpoint as well. This is why I expressly said I fully oppose the ban on the veil.
But whenever I see traditional garment, I'm reminded that for many of us, finding an identity seems only possible through common fantasy or history with a but tiny fraction of the human race. And this saddens me enormously.
While one can expect an Islamophile blog such as Informed Comment, it's still saddens me to see apologetic articles perpetuating half- and non-truths alike.
1. Women are not forced to wear hijabs
While certainly true that not all woman are forced to wear hijabs all the time, a blanket statement like this is just plain wrong. Many women ARE very much forced to wear hijabs, just like many not wearing them are scorned and insulted on a daily basis.
2. You’re not sexually oppressed
So it seems these women try and prove their independence by adhering to the tenets of an inherently patriarchal system. As the authors states, wearing the hijab gives them 'more space to engage in activities'. That also means that not wearing it gives them less space. If that is not the very definition of oppression I don't know what is.
3. You’re not more likely to be linked to terrorism
The only factually accurate statement in this article.
I do take issue with the media anti-muslim bias, which is far from a one-sided deal. Pro-Muslim apologists are still widely represented, Muslim criminal names are altered or withheld to prevent increasing communal tensions, and one needs only one glance at viral pictures and the subsequent outpour of (symbolic) support to see that these are not al all anti-Muslim in their entirety, in fact quite the opposite.
4. It’s not a ‘West versus rest’ division
With great sorrow I would refer the author to the many online Muslim communities, especially those based in W-Europe. Reading these forums where one is granted the freedom to voice his or her concerns without any fear of repercussion, it is very much a tale of 'the West vs the Rest'. I wish it wasn't so, but I have simply read too many posts perpetuating this very emotion to be convinced that it isn't a widespread sentiment in the Muslim community living in the West.
Also, the fact that capitalism is jumping on the opportunity to make money of Islamic dress does not in any way, shape of form indicate an inherent relationship or compatibility between the two. To the contrary, it is beyond ironic that only faith in money and greed seems able to transcend borders and communities, and that capitalism is easily able to overcome even those vehemently opposed to it.
5. The hijab is not something to be feared
It is, for me and many others, a symbol of a religious and political system based in make-belief, archaic assumptions, the subjugation of the individual to a cult claiming to have all the answers.
That being said, I vehemently oppose the ban of the veil in any form. We should garantuee the freedom for anyone to wear whatever they choose. Furthermore, one cannot 'ban the veil', one can only ban veiled woman from participating in society outside their own community.
But with this freedom comes our right to question, criticise, and deride the motives that come with the choice of following ancient rites and rituals, such as covering one's body to shield herself from predatory glances.
I hope to grow old in a secular Europe, a continent where people can shake off their superstitions both old and new and contribute to a society that points to a moldable and inclusive future, not to a dividing past set in stone.
Everytime I see a veil, I'm reminded we're not quite there yet.
Stellar article, containing many of the reasons why the rest of the world couldn’t care less about the Trump hysteria of the american press, let alone the Russia one. The complete refusal of the so-called american political left to face the realities of interventionist policies of both republican AND democratic presidents alike, directly caused the loss of the candidate whose only promise was ‘more of the same’. As long as this doesn’t change, the american people will vote for whichever goon promises them something else.
Those of us in the rest of the world can only watch in utter amazement how a once great country tears itself and the world apart in a nasty swirl of political opportunism, corporate interests and religious insanity no better than that of many third world nations.
/soapbox
Challenging racism by posing that 'white people are privileged yet complacent, and refuse to listen' might not have the intended effect.
In the midst of all this, the western left stands flabbergasted at the far-right pushback against this sort of parlance.
For those of us in the middle it's a sad show; bigots on both sides with no end in sight.
North Korea very much carries weight in military world affairs, as it plays a pivotal role as buffer state between China and US best ally S-Korea. China does NOT want a US-allied reunified Korea at its borders. Already they are quite displeased with US air defense batteries protecting S-Korea from missile attacks.
The nuclear proliferation of the Kim regime is also making Japan quite nervous, which could entice them to go nuclear themselves; another scenario China absolutely does not want to see unfold.
Add the thousands of artillery rounds that will land on Seoul in any major conflict between N-Korea and whomever, and you have a country that punches well above its weight in international affairs, both politically and yes, militarily.
The US could defeat North Korea in a day, literally. But that would mean thousands of casualties on both sides of the border, and a refugee problem the likes of which the world has rarely seen. Again, China does not want to absorb a couple million undereducated, malnutrioned Koreans.
The only solution that benefits everyone (except the North Korean people) is the status quo, which with Kim's ambition is becoming (or indeed has become) untenable.
There is no good solution, only variations of bad ones. The can has been kicked down the road by at least half a dozen US presidents, and it's special ed tantrum child 45 that will have to choose which path to go down next.
Hunker down indeed.
The tentacles of religion are once again doing what they do best; strangling the life out of anything or anyone that dares oppose its simpleton mix of fantasy and reality.
It's an utter shame we are only allowed to point to bombs and violence as the dangerous 'extremist element' of religion, while major parts of the world being indoctrinated into lunacy on a daily basis doesn't register as a problem at all.
This wilful ignorance is and will be the cause of countless times the suffering all the IEDs in the world could ever hope to inflict.
Die Welt posted an interesting article on the previous alleged gas attack.
https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html
Stating that 'wearers of burkinis are harking back to early days of the Third Republic' is like saying that slave traders are harking back to the early days of the United States.
Regardless of the subject, just because a certain behaviour has precedent does not lend it any legimacy, nor does it mean that it's either wanted or beneficial. Pertinent to the covering of one's body, it is exactly because France has left this culture behind that backlash against the burkini is so fierce.
That being said, most of us Europeans are very much in favor of freedom of dress, that is very few people feel that we should ban the wearing of any clothing bar those that inhibit normal human interaction such as veils and balaclavas.
However, the burkini is such a symbolic case because it confronts people with the fact that having finally managed to break free from their own religion (catholicism), here comes a whole new group of people who want nothing of the sort, in fact quite the opposite.
I must say that the smoking analogy in this article is pretty spot on. Imagine a smoker lighting a cigarette in a crowded restaurant's garden, or a mother smoking while driving her children to school. None of these are illegal, yet the average reaction closely mirrors the sentiment that is felt towards overt manifestations of religion. And in Europe's case that religion happens to be Islam.
For me, if a woman wants to wear a symbol of a patriarchal system of oppression as a form of piety, I completely respect her right to choose. But that doesn't mean I have respect her choice, or the system that it represents.
A secular society is the only way to truly garantuee freedom of religion. In fact, the U.S. Constitution doesn't mention god or gods anywhere, and guarantees Freedom of Religion (which definitely includes freedom from religion) in The Bill of Rights.
It is, in essence, a godless constitution and you should be proud of that.
I also don't see why you seem to think you disagree with me in saying that indigenous people should be allowed to wear traditional clothing, since that is my viewpoint as well. This is why I expressly said I fully oppose the ban on the veil.
But whenever I see traditional garment, I'm reminded that for many of us, finding an identity seems only possible through common fantasy or history with a but tiny fraction of the human race. And this saddens me enormously.
While one can expect an Islamophile blog such as Informed Comment, it's still saddens me to see apologetic articles perpetuating half- and non-truths alike.
1. Women are not forced to wear hijabs
While certainly true that not all woman are forced to wear hijabs all the time, a blanket statement like this is just plain wrong. Many women ARE very much forced to wear hijabs, just like many not wearing them are scorned and insulted on a daily basis.
2. You’re not sexually oppressed
So it seems these women try and prove their independence by adhering to the tenets of an inherently patriarchal system. As the authors states, wearing the hijab gives them 'more space to engage in activities'. That also means that not wearing it gives them less space. If that is not the very definition of oppression I don't know what is.
3. You’re not more likely to be linked to terrorism
The only factually accurate statement in this article.
I do take issue with the media anti-muslim bias, which is far from a one-sided deal. Pro-Muslim apologists are still widely represented, Muslim criminal names are altered or withheld to prevent increasing communal tensions, and one needs only one glance at viral pictures and the subsequent outpour of (symbolic) support to see that these are not al all anti-Muslim in their entirety, in fact quite the opposite.
4. It’s not a ‘West versus rest’ division
With great sorrow I would refer the author to the many online Muslim communities, especially those based in W-Europe. Reading these forums where one is granted the freedom to voice his or her concerns without any fear of repercussion, it is very much a tale of 'the West vs the Rest'. I wish it wasn't so, but I have simply read too many posts perpetuating this very emotion to be convinced that it isn't a widespread sentiment in the Muslim community living in the West.
Also, the fact that capitalism is jumping on the opportunity to make money of Islamic dress does not in any way, shape of form indicate an inherent relationship or compatibility between the two. To the contrary, it is beyond ironic that only faith in money and greed seems able to transcend borders and communities, and that capitalism is easily able to overcome even those vehemently opposed to it.
5. The hijab is not something to be feared
It is, for me and many others, a symbol of a religious and political system based in make-belief, archaic assumptions, the subjugation of the individual to a cult claiming to have all the answers.
That being said, I vehemently oppose the ban of the veil in any form. We should garantuee the freedom for anyone to wear whatever they choose. Furthermore, one cannot 'ban the veil', one can only ban veiled woman from participating in society outside their own community.
But with this freedom comes our right to question, criticise, and deride the motives that come with the choice of following ancient rites and rituals, such as covering one's body to shield herself from predatory glances.
I hope to grow old in a secular Europe, a continent where people can shake off their superstitions both old and new and contribute to a society that points to a moldable and inclusive future, not to a dividing past set in stone.
Everytime I see a veil, I'm reminded we're not quite there yet.