Nationalism vs Bigotry, Prejudice and Racism

[Big Guy]

There have been a number of posts placed on this site whose authors claim that they are nationalists or intellectuals discussing social interaction or just sharing the truth or just not being politically correct or whatever. I suggest that their opinions are racist, bigoted, xenophobic, Islamophobic and hate propaganda.

They claim that I am wrong.

The Ku Klux Klan is considered by all to be a racist, bigoted, xenophobic, Islamophobic and hate spreading organization. The following statement is taken from the front page of the official Web Site of the Ku Klux Klan

https://www.kkk.com/

"There is a race war against whites. But our people - my white brothers and sisters - will stay committed to a non-violent resolution. That resolution must consist of solidarity in white communities around the world. The hatred for our children and their future is growing and is being fueled every single day. Stay firm in your convictions. Keep loving your heritage and keep witnessing to others that there is a better way than a war torn, violent, wicked, socialist, new world order. That way is the Christian way - law and order - love of family - love of nation. These are the principles of western Christian civilization. There is a war to destroy these things. Pray that our people see the error of their ways and regain a sense of loyalty. Repent America! Be faithful my fellow believers. " - National Director of The Knights, Pastor Thomas Robb

That organization is so repulsive that it is illegal in Canada.

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/ku-klux-klan/

There are a number of other organizations which are considered hate and racist groups which have Web Sites and declare their beliefs on their sites.

How are those anti-Muslim and Islamphobic posts different from the posts on this site? Even Robert Spencer falls short of some of the posts here.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/

May I assume you folks agree with:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/AboutSite.htm

How is your form of "Nationalism" different from the views of these racist organizations?

[Canada_First]

Jihad watch has actual news articles on its site. How is that bad exactly? They collect news from around the world on the happenings of Islam. If the truth is inconvenient for the left then I suggest they choose better role models.

Islam is not a race it's a religion. Could you please stop referring to it as a race and racism?

I see nothing wrong with your last link either. Can you show the news articles on the last two sites to be false?

Edited September 16, 2015 by Canada_First

[Accountability Now]

How is your form of "Nationalism" different from the views of these racist organizations?

Islam is not a race it's a religion. Could you please stop referring to it as a race and racism?

I have to agree with Canada_First on this one. The main issue that I see is that we don't even know who we are versing when you say Nationalism vs....

In the past we had nationalistic views against Germans and Japanese because we were at war with them. Eventually, once the wars ended we lost those views. However, those wars ended with concrete treaties. We were no longer at war which allowed our views to change. How will our views on Islam or their views on Christianity/any other religion change? I'm not saying it can't happen but it certainly won't be smooth.

I have no doubt in my mind that various sections of Islam are at war with us. I will not say that we were innocent in this as there is plenty of history to suggest otherwise however my point is that its a very confusing, and non concrete situation which is why I think you see such nationalistic response. My hope is that in time to come that we can look at these immigrants as we do like Japanese or Germans. I just don't know how long it will be and what it will take to get there.

[cybercoma]

If someone started a website called Christian Watch and curated any news story of Christians doing insane and illegal things, only to suggest that this is what "true" Christianity is despite not actually being Christians themselves, I'm pretty sure there'd be a considerable number of people who find that offensive.

Hell, Christians find the phrase "happy holidays" offensive, so it doesn't take much.

And if you can understand why a Christian would find that page offensive, then it should be pretty clear what's wrong with it.

[Canada_First]

Ok so cybercoma would prefer we ignore the terrible things Muslims are doing around the world. We'll that's one position I guess.

[Big Guy]

It is not illegal to have or to post racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, bigoted, mysogeic or xenophobic views. It is common and encouraged that one consider his/her religion, culture, politics, lifestyle, race etc. as suited to you and the best for you. You cross the line when you start to believe and declare that yours are superior to others. Another line is crossed when you blame others for your own shortcomings.

For me, tolerance is the acceptance that others believe that their religion, culture, politics, lifestyle, race etc. is best for them. It is in the arrogance of demeaning others in an attempt to elevate yours.

I guess it is far easier to believe that someone killed someone else because he/she was a male, or female, or Muslim, or black, or Italian, or blond, or Oriental, or Asian, or Aboriginal or Protestant or ... It saves all that time or effort into finding out exactly who, what, where, why or when happened.

It is even easier to take one aspect of an individual and paint all members with the same brush. I remember speaking to a Catholic missionary about his problems in explaining to third world converts that Catholic communion was not a celebration of cannibalism.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Big Guy

[Canada_First]

You're damned right I believe that I'm superior to some Muslim cave man who be heads non believers. Bombs innocent people. Flies planes into buildings. Shoots up magazine offices...and the list goes on. Yes my way of life is superior to all that.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Canada_First

[cybercoma]

Ok so cybercoma would prefer we ignore the terrible things Muslims are doing around the world. We'll that's one position I guess.

That's my position to someone who's utterly incapable of understanding words printed on the internet or who is intentionally misattributing positions to me that I didn't take.

[Canada_First]

That's my position to someone who's utterly incapable of understanding words printed on the internet or who is intentionally misattributing positions to me that I didn't take.

You said that it's bad that someone has and is gathering stories about Muslims and the terrible things they do. You'd prefer if we didn't have a resource to see all these stories in one place.

Atheist Web sites attack Christianity constantly so I don't see what the problem is? Atheists hate Jesus.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Canada_First

[cybercoma]

Like I said, your comprehension failure is yours.

[Canada_First]

I am happy that I see the truth. Nothing bad about a site that allows people to find out all the terrible things that Muslims do around the world.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Canada_First

[-1=e^ipi]

I remember speaking to a Catholic missionary about his problems in explaining to third world converts that Catholic communion was not a celebration of cannibalism.

Wait, it isn't? This is new to me. I thought all the eating flesh, drinking blood and worshiping a zombie made it pretty cannibalistic.

[Shady]

Christians find things offensive, they just don't tend to kill people when they do. Biggest difference between Islam and any other religion.

[BubberMiley]

Christians find things offensive, they just don't tend to kill people when they do. Biggest difference between Islam and any other religion.

The stupidest thing a person could ever do is try to make his enemy more powerful by lumping them with a billion other people. The. Stupidest. Thing. A. Person. Could. Ever. Do.

[cybercoma]

The stupidest thing a person could ever do is try to make his enemy more powerful by lumping them with a billion other people. The. Stupidest. Thing. A. Person. Could. Ever. Do.

Not when you make money on creating the perception that the threat to us is bigger than it is.

[Shady]

The stupidest thing a person could ever do is try to make his enemy more powerful by lumping them with a billion other people. The. Stupidest. Thing. A. Person. Could. Ever. Do.

Unfortunately 30 - 40% of those billion people, in some countries it's even higher, share similar views of the "enemy".

[BubberMiley]

Unfortunately 30 - 40% of those billion people, in some countries it's even higher, share similar views of the "enemy".

We should be having several terrorist attacks a day in Canada alone then. I guess the Media Party just isn't telling us about them.

[Guest]

It is not illegal to have or to post racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, bigoted, mysogeic or xenophobic views. It is common and encouraged that one consider his/her religion, culture, politics, lifestyle, race etc. as suited to you and the best for you. You cross the line when you start to believe and declare that yours are superior to others. Another line is crossed when you blame others for your own shortcomings.

For me, tolerance is the acceptance that others believe that their religion, culture, politics, lifestyle, race etc. is best for them. It is in the arrogance of demeaning others in an attempt to elevate yours.

I guess it is far easier to believe that someone killed someone else because he/she was a male, or female, or Muslim, or black, or Italian, or blond, or Oriental, or Asian, or Aboriginal or Protestant or ... It saves all that time or effort into finding out exactly who, what, where, why or when happened.

It is even easier to take one aspect of an individual and paint all members with the same brush. I remember speaking to a Catholic missionary about his problems in explaining to third world converts that Catholic communion was not a celebration of cannibalism.

I am curious as to what level of criticism of any religion you would find acceptable?

I agree that one definition of "tolerance is the acceptance that others believe that their religion, culture, politics, lifestyle, race etc. is best for them." Do you agree that such a definition only applies when those "others" refrain completely from ever letting their religious beliefs have them try and dictate how others act?

Edit> Those who don't want to be dictated to that is. I can't help it if some willingly go along. ( I thought I'd best clarify)

Edited September 17, 2015 by bcsapper

[Big Guy]

I am curious as to what level of criticism of any religion you would find acceptable?

...

Thank you for your question. I am not sure that I understand what you are asking.

Most religions are far more similar than they are different. They are basically tenets or templates of how to survive in a society. Each also has built in dogma which implies (sometimes dictates) that it is the only "true" religion. Logically, that would lead to the belief that all other religions have flaws in them.

There are many aspects of every established religion which can be interpreted. From my point of view that is what faith is all about.

This is what I believe and this is what you believe. I do not believe what you believe but I do not question your right to your beliefs - as long as it is not interpreted by you in a way that does harm to me.

Every Holy Book of every religion has been written, translated, rewritten etc to where some passages are questionable. There are also many tenets that cannot be acceptable to the educated individual. I have had some interesting discussions on Papal Infallibility in the Catholic Church - but I digress...

I believe that people are not "bad" or "good" based on their beliefs. Their actions dictate my evaluation.

Each to his/her own.

[Canada_First]

I have read and been told by Muslims that the Koran has never been rewritten. That while we have many different bibles. Only one Koran.

[Guest]

Thank you for your question. I am not sure that I understand what you are asking.

Most religions are far more similar than they are different. They are basically tenets or templates of how to survive in a society. Each also has built in dogma which implies (sometimes dictates) that it is the only "true" religion. Logically, that would lead to the belief that all other religions have flaws in them.

There are many aspects of every established religion which can be interpreted. From my point of view that is what faith is all about.

This is what I believe and this is what you believe. I do not believe what you believe but I do not question your right to your beliefs - as long as it is not interpreted by you in a way that does harm to me.

Every Holy Book of every religion has been written, translated, rewritten etc to where some passages are questionable. There are also many tenets that cannot be acceptable to the educated individual. I have had some interesting discussions on Papal Infallibility in the Catholic Church - but I digress...

I believe that people are not "bad" or "good" based on their beliefs. Their actions dictate my evaluation.

Each to his/her own.

What if their actions are based on, and guided by, their beliefs? What if they have choices, as all religious people do, but they choose to believe the truly rotten aspects of their religion and are okay hurting people because of them?

[Big Guy]

What if their actions are based on, and guided by, their beliefs? What if they have choices, as all religious people do, but they choose to believe the truly rotten aspects of their religion and are okay hurting people because of them?

Then they are misinterpreting the intent of the teachings. They may be doing so because of an honest ignorance of the intent or because it fits their particular agenda. Those actions are obviously wrong and should not be encouraged. There is no excuse to hurt people.

[Bonam]

Then they are misinterpreting the intent of the teachings.

So your belief is that no religion has any teachings which, when properly interpreted, encourage hurting other people?

[Guest]

Then they are misinterpreting the intent of the teachings. They may be doing so because of an honest ignorance of the intent or because it fits their particular agenda. Those actions are obviously wrong and should not be encouraged. There is no excuse to hurt people.

What if they are given the intent by recognised teachers? Those in a position of influence, who are relied upon to provide scholarly interpretations of their religion.

I agree there is no excuse to hurt people. You seem to be saying in your OP that there is no excuse to notice. I wonder where, for you, the line is drawn between a genuine disgust at the actions of others due to their interpretation of their religion, and that same disgust because you just don't like them, regardless of what they do.

[Big Guy]

.... I wonder where, for you, the line is drawn between a genuine disgust at the actions of others due to their interpretation of their religion, and that same disgust because you just don't like them, regardless of what they do.

Assuming that we both agree that "disgust" is ;"a feeling of revulsion or profound disapproval aroused by something unpleasant or offensive" then I think I do not have the capacity any more to be "disgusted" at anything. Those that hurt and kill because they genuinely believe they are doing the work of their God are mistaken for a variety of reasons - disgusted by them ? No. Sorry for them and their victims - yes. If they end up joining their God sooner because of their attempt to hurt others then that would seem just to me.

I try not to look at people in a format as part of a "group" and dislike that group. I believe that everyone is born equal and slowly formed by their environment. Each person is also distinct in their personality and should be evaluated on personal actions and decisions rather than the "group" to which we think they belong. At this point in my life, there are five individuals who I do not like. Each is from a different background and my attitude towards them is based on my personal interaction with them.

There are many people with whom I disagree and respect. We have a group who meet every Wednesday in the Legion and discuss a vast range of world issues buoyed by intermittent refreshments. The members range from socialist leanings to far right wing views (the group as a whole tends towards the philosophical right as do most in Legions) and need no encouragement to share and support our different positions.

Thank you for your interest and I apologize for running on - a weakness developed through years of being listened to by a captive audience.