You're trying to say that we're all the same, we have the same weaknesses and same values, the same hopes and dreams et etc etc.
No. I'm saying we share a common humanity and losing sight of that is bad news.
The terribly moderate, tolerant extreme tree hugging blindness that allows all sorts of abhorrences to grow undisturbed for fear of being labelled racist.
You see? You make assumptions about me and you end up saying things which are blatantly wrong. You should ask me, rather than assuming.
Did you know that I consider there is a viable argument that ethnic cleansing might be a solution to the problems in the long term?
Do you consider ethnic cleansing a policy of a 'blind tree hugger afraid being labelled racist'?
I'm not advocating it, but I'm afraid it may be the route that saves the most lives in the long term.
I seem to remember similar arguments being presented by you over the asian child abuse scandals and FGM, you just could bring yourself to accept that institutions looked the other way and were too frightened of racial accusations to protect their citizens from harmful practices.
I seem to remember you not listening to me and making up stories about me then, too.
These issues need to be confronted for what they are - bad and destructive behaviours that will destroy our societies if we tolerate them.
Our societies are not at threat from the behaviours of Islamist extremists. Theirs are.
This is one of the most patronising few sentences I've seen written on these boards and the competition is intense.
If only you had long term memory and you'd remember the mess we got in when I spoke to you like a peer.
You assume I need introducing to these concepts, that I'm not thoroughly aware of the stupidity of demonizing whole races?
No, I'd be very surprised if you didn't. I was explaining my actual motivations because you had impugned them as a debate tactic.
We've gone beyond your simplistic 'we are the world' arguments and beginning to recognise that some ways of organising societies are better than others
Yes. And there is disagreement over that. Do we force our version of organising societies on other peoples at gunpoint?
that some ideas are bad and that some religious ideologies and cultural practices must be outlawed if we're to advance our socities further and get along together.
I absolutely agree. I tried to argue for the criminalization of circumcision for instance, but apparently slicing children's genitals is a parent's decision but two adults can't choose to settle their civil matters through a religious court or arbitration method, if that religious court is Muslim especially. I don't really understand how the rules work for other people, but I've been on board with this since my adulthood began.
It's not that Muslims are bad - they are just like everyone else, but that some Islamic dogma is bad and needs to be reformed.
Exactly.
We need to do more to encourage Muslims to change how their religion deals with modern society and adapt to it rather than look the other way and tolerate things that repell us.
Close, but be careful.
The Muslims here? We need to work on mutually integrating with them. We learn to tolerate the beliefs we disagree with, and they learn to play by the rules in so far as advocating their beliefs.
Over there? We've tried this at gunpoint. You know what happened? The Tamil Tigers lost their place as the number one suicide attack group to Islamists.
So we need a better plan, yes?
It took a couple of centuries for Christianity to reform into a more-or-less harmless belief system. We need to move faster with Islam.
Agreed, and things were going quite well as far as Islamic reform in the 19th Century. But then the Ottoman Empire fell and Europe tried to replace it with nation states. Then we ended up with minoritarian governments ruling with an iron fist over the majorities which is tentatively stable, but as we have seen - can collapse into absolute chaos and bloodshed.
So let's promote moderate Islam, which we can only do by being careful not to blame Islam for the violence.
We need a response to Saudi Arabia that is effective.
We need to pull out our military units from Muslim lands. It means we sacrifice control of the situation, but one key feature repeats itself in martyrdom videos and jihadist propaganda: Military forces in their lands.
As for ISIS? I have no clue, it's a mess of the war class and it's way too messy for me to be confident in the best steps.
But you know what?
We won't do the right thing.
There's too much money in doing the wrong thing.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
(1)