29
   

Rising fascism in the US

 
 
revelette1
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:45 am
@Olivier5,
Well, I would not like to live in a country where you are made to obey moral laws whether you were Muslim or not, so a Catholic country if I must choose. I know your point, which is probably why so many in those countries choose to live elsewhere. I am not sure what we can do about countries like Saudi Arabia and others who have strict moral laws.

However, that is different thing than the religion itself and the Quran vs. the Bible or the Tanach.(Jewish Bible?)

The way our country is going, with the far right holding sway over our (US) country, pushing more of their beliefs into our laws and the SC upholding it, it is pretty dismaying. Although the thing is with our country, with new leadership, and with time, all of it can be changed back. Some of us may be dead or really old by then though.

maxdancona
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:01 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

As a woman, and if you had to make this choice, would you rather live in a predominently Catholic country, or in a predominently Muslim country?


France is a catholic Country, a colonial power who subjugated several African countries. The United States has always been majority Christian and was a slave holding nation until 1863. For someone from France and someone from the United States to sit in judgment of indigenous cultures is tone deaf at best.

I would guess that most indigenous women would choose their own culture over the culture of the United States or France.

Western Europe came into these indigenous cultures. We stole their land. We destroyed their way of life. We enslaved them.

And now we are their saviors, protecting them from their own cultural practices.
Olivier5
 
  3  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:08 am
@revelette1,
Just saying, it's quite facile to like Islam from afar and in theory, but it's less easy to like it when you happen to live in a predominently Muslim country. Not that everything is bad -- there's much to like but there's also a massive social pressure, particularly on women.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:11 am
@maxdancona,
Call me tone deaf then. Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  3  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:12 am
@maxdancona,
Hey Max! Have you noted the migration patterns, of late? All these people fleeing Catholic countries to emigrate to Muslim ones, you know? That's saying something.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:14 am
@Olivier5,
Do you think this is because of cultural supremacy?

I suspect that economic dominance of Western countries has more to do with it. I suspect historically you will see net migration into the dominant economy no matter the culture involved. We saw this with imperial Rome, China ancient Egypt.

We are the economic and cultural hegemon of the day. This doesnt make us morally superior in any global sense.
Olivier5
 
  3  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:23 am
@maxdancona,
It's about physical and economic security, obviously. Take Afghanistan, a country I know well and the origin of many modern migrants. Who wants to live in a country that has been in some form of civil war since 1979? That's almost 40 years ago.... Something like 90% of the population has never known peace. They're born in war and die in war. No wonder they want to live in peaceful Europe...
maxdancona
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:39 am
@Olivier5,
Sure. The fact that people are migrating from former colonies, to their former colonizers isn't a surprise. The fact that the former colonizers are still imposing cultural restrictions on their former colonies isn't a surprise either. This doesn't make the colonizers morally superior in any universal sense. It just means that they had the economic power.

Judging indigenous cultures in terms of Western feminism is troubling.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:42 am
@revelette1,
Would you rather live in Catholic Philippines with President Duterte?


Quote:
MANILA, Philippines (AP) — Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte lashed out Sunday at another U.N. human rights expert for making critical remarks about his supposed role in the expulsion of the chief justice, telling him "to go to hell."

Duterte dismissed the remarks of Diego Garcia-Sayan and told him not to meddle in domestic problems. Duterte was replying to a reporter's question before flying on a visit to South Korea.

"Tell him not to interfere with the affairs of my country. He can go to hell," Duterte said in a late-night televised news conference. "He is not a special person and I do not recognize his rapporteur title."

Garcia-Sayan told reporters in Manila on Thursday that the unprecedented ouster of Maria Lourdes Sereno as chief justice after Duterte lambasted her in public is an attack on judicial independence that could put Philippine democracy at risk.

Duterte has reacted with similar public outbursts in the past against other U.N. rapporteurs who raised alarm and sought an independent investigation into his bloody campaign against illegal drugs, which has left thousands of mostly poor drug suspects dead.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/duterte-tells-un-expert-hell-over-criticism-045852427.html


Or the Muslim Kingdom of Morocco?

Quote:
On Thursday, the Moroccan delegation to the UNGA held a reception in Morocco’s residence in New York in the presence of Nasser Bourita, Morocco’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mohamed Yassine Mansouri, Director-General of Directorate of Studies and Documentation (DGED), and Omar Hilale, Moroccan Ambassador to the United Nations (UN).


During the reception, the African and Caribbean delegations expressed their appreciation for Morocco, which they said, due to the king’s clear-sighted leadership, has become a bastion of political stability and an advocate of South-South cooperation and co-development, enhancing investment and partnership in both the African continent and the Caribbean region, reported Maghreb Arab Press (MAP).

Umaro Sissoco Embalo, Guinea-Bissau’s Prime Minister, expressed his gratitude to Morocco, which in the past “showed support to several African liberation movements.” He also recalled the “great historical ties of his country to Morocco.”

Those bonds, he explained, has been renewed at “higher level under the leadership of King Mohammed VI with his many royal visits to Africa and laudable initiatives towards the continent,” said Embalo. He noted that “Morocco’s airline Royal Air Maroc was the only airline that did not stop its flights to the African countries that were affected by Ebola.”

Embalo has also emphasized that the king’s speech during the 28th African Union Summit in Addis Ababa “will be forever engraved in the memory of Africa.” The official has also recalled one of the strongest statements delivered by the King during the 28th African Union Summit, when he said, “I am home at last and happily reunited with you.”

Leonardo She Okitundu, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, said that his country “appreciates positively” Morocco’s actions in Africa and the return of the country within the African Union.

“It was a very emotional moment when the sovereign marked his return to the great African family,” explained Okitundu. “Morocco has regained its place not only because it is an African country, but above all it has much to offer in terms of South-South and triangular cooperation.”

Colin Granderson, Deputy Secretary General of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), pointed out that Morocco is a great friend of the Caribbean countries, with which it has “very close” cooperation relations.

Granderson also applauded Morocco’s leadership internationally and within the United Nations, including the kingdom’s commitment to actions on climate change, which he said is a high priority for Caribbean countries vulnerable to extreme weather.


https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2017/09/229207/african-caribbean-delegations-king-mohammed-vi-south-south-cooperation/<br />

I know where I'd rather be. Trying to reduce everything to simplistic terms is what bigots do. Olivier has refused to accept any other form of Sunni Islam other than Wahhabism, and he's ignored constant condemnation of terrorist atrocities by mainstream Muslim leaders.

During WW2 Denmark and France were both occupied by the Nazis. While the Danes secretly shipped the Jewish population off to neutral Sweden and safety, many French collaborated with the Nazis in confiscating Jewish property and shipping the people off to death camps.

Quote:
The rescue of the Danish Jews occurred during Nazi Germany's occupation of Denmark during World War II. On October 1, 1943, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler ordered Danish Jews to be arrested and deported. Despite great personal risk, the Danish resistance movement, with the assistance of many ordinary Danish citizens, managed to evacuate 7,220 of Denmark's 7,800 Jews, plus 686 non-Jewish spouses, by sea to nearby neutral Sweden.

The rescue allowed the vast majority of Denmark's Jewish population to avoid capture by the Nazis and is considered to be one of the largest actions of collective resistance to aggression in the countries occupied by Nazi Germany. As a result of the rescue, and the following Danish intercession on behalf of the 464 Danish Jews who were captured and deported to the Theresienstadt transit camp in Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, over 99% of Denmark's Jewish population survived the Holocaust.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_of_the_Danish_Jews

Quote:
PARIS (Reuters) - France said on Friday it had agreed to put $60 million into a fund managed by the United States to compensate Holocaust victims deported by French state rail firm SNCF to Nazi death camps, a deal that protects it from future U.S. litigation.

About 76,000 Jews were arrested in France during World War Two and transported in appalling conditions in railway boxcars to concentration camps such as Auschwitz, where most died.

In 1995 France’s then-president, Jacques Chirac, officially acknowledged for the first time French complicity in the wartime deportations. But it was only in 2009 that France’s highest court recognized the state’s responsibility.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-usa-holocaust/france-to-pay-60-million-for-holocaust-victims-deported-by-state-rail-firm-idUSKCN0JJ1TB20141205<br />

Now would you rather live in friendly Copenhagen or rude and nasty Paris?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:43 am
@maxdancona,
I would hope that no one pays any attention to feminist raving, but otherwise I'm all for forcibly civilizing savage cultures.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 09:58 am
I wouldn't like to live in any country which was not free to believe in whatever they want to believe in and practice that belief however they see fit, or free to not to believe in anything without any fear persecution. That is just my personal preference. Otherwise I am out of this pitting one country against another contest.

No offense.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 10:06 am
@maxdancona,
But neither Italy nor France ever colonized Afghanistan.... Your post is neither here nor there. If you'd rather refrain from judging or opining on other people or nations, you might as well start with me and my nation.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 10:08 am
@revelette1,
You live in a country where certain beliefs can not be practiced. Indigenous peoples in many places, including Native American cultures, Aboriginal Australian and Southeast Asia, had child marriages. These are not permitted in Western European cultures.

We do not allow child marriages, even by people who come from those indigenous cultures that traditionally practice them. These practices are clearly unacceptable in a modern Western cultural context. That doesn't mean that they weren't beneficial in indigenous cultures.
Olivier5
 
  3  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 10:19 am
@maxdancona,
Your point is correct but the example is wrong. Child marriages are legal in many US states. Polygamy would work better as an example of the same point.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 11:52 am
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:
I wouldn't like to live in any country which was not free to believe in whatever they want to believe in and practice that belief however they see fit, or free to not to believe in anything without any fear persecution. That is just my personal preference. Otherwise I am out of this pitting one country against another contest.

No offense.

None taken. I didn't mean it as a contest. Rather, I meant to point out that we often approach the issue in a rather theoretical manner on these boards, in an effort not to fall into wholesale Islamophobia and racism, and that's fine with me and I do it too, but in practice we live more or less happily in (traditionally) Christian countries, irrespective of our current belief in god(s) or lack thereof, and quite a few of us I suspect would be keener to move to Italy than Saudi Arabia.

I do agree with the Push (a rare occurence) that Morroco is a nice place to live. In fact quite a few French retire there these days, adding fuel to an already vibrant economy. But Morroco is diferent. E.g. their constitution recognises the Muslim and Arab character of the nation side by side with its Tamashek origins and even its Jewish influences!

Quote:
État musulman souverain, attaché à son unité nationale et à son intégrité territoriale, le Royaume du Maroc entend préserver, dans sa plénitude et sa diversité, son identité nationale une et indivisible. Son unité, forgée par la convergence de ses composantes arabo-islamique, amazighe et saharo-hassanie, s'est nourrie et enrichie de ses affluents africain, andalou, hébraïque et méditerranéen.

La prééminence accordée à la religion musulmane dans ce référentiel national va de pair avec l'attachement du peuple marocain aux valeurs d'ouverture, de modération, de tolérance et de dialogue pour la compréhension mutuelle entre toutes les cultures et les civilisations du monde.

http://mjp.univ-perp.fr/constit/ma2011.htm
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 01:44 pm
@maxdancona,
It is because children are not old enough to make decisions on whether to be married or not. Some religious practices bring harm to innocents and in that case, it is right they can't practice that belief. In medieval times I believe the acceptable age to be married was 10, but not to live as man and wife usually, that usually didn't happen until the child had her menstrual cycle. Fortunately, that is not longer the case in most western countries.

Furthermore, to be honest, I would rather live in Italy than Saudi Arabia even if I was accepted to be able to live there on account of the restrictions and harsh punishments and even death. I can't stand to be restricted so I know I wouldn't be able to tolerate living there. But that is my preference.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 02:21 pm
@revelette1,
The implication is that indigenous women and children need White people to protect them from their own culture. What would have happened to these indigenous culture had White people never shown up?

The narrative is the European culture went from running a world wide slave trade to saviors of the world in about 200 years. Doesn't this seem a little suspicious? Of course, Western Europe 200 years ago considered itself as morally right as it does now... and of course they have always had the economic and military power to back up that belief (as they do now).

Do you accept the possibility that maybe these indigenous cultures are not actually inferior to yours, and yours just seems right to you because you are a part of it?


izzythepush
 
  2  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 02:31 pm
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:

In medieval times I believe the acceptable age to be married was 10,


Tennessee remained steadfastly medieval until 2001.

Quote:
Unlike most Western countries, 20 of the U.S. states do not have a legal minimum age of marriage. Individuals aged 18 have the ability to marry in U.S. states except Nebraska (19) and Mississippi (21). In addition, all states, except Delaware, allow minors to marry in certain circumstances, such as parental consent, judicial consent, pregnancy, or a combination of these situations. Most states allow parties aged 16 and 17 to marry with parental consent alone. In most states, children under 16 can be married too. In the 30 states which have an absolute minimum age set by statute, this age varies between 13 and 18, while in 20 states there is no statutory minimum age if other legal conditions are met. Although in such states there is no set minimum age by statute, the traditional common law minimum age is 14 for boys and 12 for girls - ages which have been confirmed by case law in some states. Over the past 15 years, more than 200,000 minors married in US, and in Tennessee girls as young as 10 were married in 2001, before the state finally set a minimum age of 17 in 2018.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_marriage_in_the_United_States<br /> <br />
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 04:04 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Do you accept the possibility that maybe these indigenous cultures are not actually inferior to yours, and yours just seems right to you because you are a part of it?
I certainly don't. If a culture is unable to act civilized, then they are not civilized.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Tue 5 Jun, 2018 04:44 pm
@Olivier5,
That’s a ******* strong point.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.15 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 03:41:01