Sam Harris on Bill Maher

[Boges]

Another Muslim thread. 

This interview last night addresses a lot of the issues we debate on this board. The idea that fundamentalist Islam is not some insignificant fringe of the religion and if any other religion acted this way we wouldn't tolerate it. 

They also bring up the issue that when  moderate Muslims do speak out they're often  shouted down by the left as Uncle Toms.

http://www.salon.com/2017/02/04/watch-sam-harris-tells-bill-maher-we-need-to-win-the-war-of-ideas/

“We are trying to find ways to disempower Trump,” said Maher, “and the left is often not helping.”  Obama was also taken to task for handling Muslim relations poorly. “The president has been lying for eight years; it’s not to say he hasn’t been flying drones, but he hasn’t been bombing the Amish.”

 

[Michael Hardner]

I am comfortable with such discussions, and uncomfortable when they are shouted down.  But they necessarily have to be led by the community that is looking to reflect on itself, IMO.  Criticism across cultural gap doesn't usually go anywhere.  When has any group said "this other group has criticized us in this way, we should listen ?" and accepted the criticism on the whole ?

At worse, it turns into scapegoating and triggers the unhinged to violence.  That's a real consequence of these kind of discussions, so I think discussion of the discussion needs to happen first.

[The_Squid]

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

this other group has criticized us in this way, we should listen ?" and accepted the criticism on the whole ?

S. Africa?

we have to criticize bad ideas, regardless of our cultural divide.  Islam is the most violent religion by far in the world today.  We may not be able to reform it from the outside, but being critical may embolden Muslims to try and do so from the inside.  

People like Ayaan Hirsi Ali need all the support they can get!

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, The_Squid said:

S. Africa?

we have to criticize bad ideas, regardless of our cultural divide.  Islam is the most violent religion by far in the world today.  We may not be able to reform it from the outside, but being critical may embolden Muslims to try and do so from the inside.  

People like Ayaan Hirsi Ali need all the support they can get!

Perhaps South Africa but there was a huge economic impact at play.  

Go ahead and criticize other cultures, but what is the point of it ?  Is it going to achieve anything ?  Do you really think the mechanism of criticism embolding those on the inside to action would work ?  

How much support does Ayaan Hirsi have from inside ?

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I am comfortable with such discussions, and uncomfortable when they are shouted down.  But they necessarily have to be led by the community that is looking to reflect on itself, IMO.  Criticism across cultural gap doesn't usually go anywhere.  When has any group said "this other group has criticized us in this way, we should listen ?" and accepted the criticism on the whole ?

At worse, it turns into scapegoating and triggers the unhinged to violence.  That's a real consequence of these kind of discussions, so I think discussion of the discussion needs to happen first.

So worlwide criticism of the Trump adminstration is wrong, and we should leave it to the GOP to sort it out.

They can let us know when they have the answer!

[Guest]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Perhaps South Africa but there was a huge economic impact at play.  

Go ahead and criticize other cultures, but what is the point of it ?  Is it going to achieve anything ?  Do you really think the mechanism of criticism embolding those on the inside to action would work ?  

How much support does Ayaan Hirsi have from inside ?

How much support should she have?  I have no idea what the answer to that question is, but I would say that the less support she has, the more she needs from those outside her culture.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

So worlwide criticism of the Trump adminstration is wrong, and we should leave it to the GOP to sort it out.

They can let us know when they have the answer!

It's not wrong to criticize, but ...

1) People need to recognize that the US is sovereign and has no responsibility to other nations, beyond maybe keeping its obligations and its reputation

2) Money talks, b***s*** walks

3) When exactly do you expect Trump to come to the podium and say "folks... I was just made aware of my boorish behavior by PM Justin Trudeau and I come to you today cap in hand bearing shame..."

Criticism as such is parlor talk.  Most parlor talk is entertainment, or gossip.  Some gossip is better than other gossip.

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

How much support should she have?  I have no idea what the answer to that question is, but I would say that the less support she has, the more she needs from those outside her culture.

You have no idea how much support she has from inside her culture ?  How do we know that by supporting her we're betting on the right horse ?  Seems wrongheaded to me.  There's Irshad Manji too, who is not a viable ambassador to wider Islam on how they should progress.  Maybe to Canadians she is.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You have no idea how much support she has from inside her culture ?  How do we know that by supporting her we're betting on the right horse ?  Seems wrongheaded to me.  There's Irshad Manji too, who is not a viable ambassador to wider Islam on how they should progress.  Maybe to Canadians she is.

I have no idea, no.  Nor any of the support Irshad Manji has in the wider Islamic cuture.  I'm pretty sure more would be better.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, bcsapper said:

I have no idea, no.  Nor any of the support Irshad Manji has in the wider Islamic cuture.  I'm pretty sure more would be better.

Right.  So you're proving that there is no dialogue between these two cultures anyway.  So how is criticism going to even be heard on the other side ?  It's not.  It serves to entertain us.

[Argus]

34 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I am comfortable with such discussions, and uncomfortable when they are shouted down.  But they necessarily have to be led by the community that is looking to reflect on itself, IMO.  Criticism across cultural gap doesn't usually go anywhere.  When has any group said "this other group has criticized us in this way, we should listen ?" and accepted the criticism on the whole ?

The problem is when a community is insular and its processes are completely controlled by a narrow elite with limitless power you cannot expect change to arise from within unless it is prodded from without. Those religious figures in the Muslim world who determine what is and is not acceptable to do or say or think are perfectly comfortable with the way things are, and in particular, with the way all must defer to them. They have no need to change anything, and indeed, their power rests upon the inability of anyone secular to contradict the will of Allah - as interpreted by THEM, of course. Disagree with that interpretation? Why, that's BLASPHEMY! And you can quickly find your life forfeit. Fed up and want to leave the religion and find one more moderate? Why that's APOSTASY! And again you can be killed or imprisoned. The Muslim world is not one in which there can be any public self-examination. Which is why the only actual moderate Muslims are people in Western countries who have been constantly exposed to the criticism of the religion's backward moral beliefs and intolerance.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Right.  So you're proving that there is no dialogue between these two cultures anyway.  So how is criticism going to even be heard on the other side ?  It's not.  It serves to entertain us.

I did not prove anything. I expessed ignorance of certain facts that you might have. (I'll give a like to anyone crass enough to edit that sentence to remove the last bit)

I have to say I think that's a strange position to take.  Criticism of something that deserves the strongest criticism should be, what, censored, because it isn't currently being paid any attention to? (your opinion only.  It might be reaching people)

 

[dialamah]

42 minutes ago, Boges said:

Another Muslim thread. 

 

And I will do my personal best to keep it from devolving into a long and pointless argument.   

Quote

This interview last night addresses a lot of the issues we debate on this board. The idea that fundamentalist Islam is not some insignificant fringe of the religion and if any other religion acted this way we wouldn't tolerate it. 

 

I don't get the sense we are tolerating it; extremist actions by Muslims are condemned around the world, by Muslims and non-Muslims.  We've also committed a fair amount of military expenditure to fighting Islamic forces in the Middle East.  While I personally am not sure we should be there at all, this doesn't look to me like 'tolerating' an extreme form of Islam.  

The West has also long spoken out against countries that enshrine extreme versions of Sharia law as being inhumane; again, that is not tolerating extremism.   But it doesn't seem to have had much effect.  

Quote

They also bring up the issue that when  moderate Muslims do speak out they're often  shouted down by the left as Uncle Toms.

I have to admit that it's been moderate Muslims who've spoken out who have made me rethink my ideas on specifically, the Niqab, as well as learning about the real health risks wearing that clothing presents to women and so I'm more open to the idea of restricting the use of the niqab, sort of.   It's still a very real issue in my mind that forbidding women from wearing the niqab for any reason may have the unintended consequence of making those women less free and more subject to oppressive and restrictive family and community mores.  

I agree with the statement that it's the ideas behind extremism that have to be addressed.   Spreading the information that extreme form of dress was not taught by Mohammed, and is not part of the Koran (for instance) would do more to eliminate the wearing of that dress than making laws against it, wouldn't it?    

I think it's a problem when Western countries use sanctions against *some* countries who practice human rights abuses, but do business with other countries who practice the same human rights abuses.   

[Michael Hardner]

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) The problem is when a community is insular and its processes are completely controlled by a narrow elite with limitless power you cannot expect change to arise from within unless it is prodded from without.

2) Which is why the only actual moderate Muslims are people in Western countries who have been constantly exposed to the criticism of the religion's backward moral beliefs and intolerance.

1) If they are insular how can prodding from without help ?  There still may be reasons to criticize/discuss but the audience will be outside the group itself, which should mitigate the discussion in several ways.

2) This sounds like a practical approach, a bridge/wedge into one culture from another.  Why don't we ask those people how to lead the discussion ?  I guarantee you whatever comes out of that will not embolden mass killers.

8 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

1) I did not prove anything. I expessed ignorance of certain facts that you might have. (I'll give a like to anyone crass enough to edit that sentence to remove the last bit)

2) I have to say I think that's a strange position to take.  Criticism of something that deserves the strongest criticism should be, what, censored, because it isn't currently being paid any attention to? (your opinion only.  It might be reaching people)

1) I have no idea either.  We're talking about two distinct cultural bubbles, like Trump people and Clinton people, Habs fans and Leafs fans...

2) Censoring is telling other people to shut up.  I wouldn't do that at least directly.  I would ask "Why are you talking about this ?".  As with my dialogue with Argus above, asking people questions can release ideas.

[Argus]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) If they are insular how can prodding from without help ?  There still may be reasons to criticize/discuss but the audience will be outside the group itself, which should mitigate the discussion in several ways.

They are not immune to western communication, witness the murderous response to some little Danish newspaper printing some not-very-insulting cartoons about Islam. They hear about the disapproval, especially the political elites and the wealthy who travel abroad.

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) This sounds like a practical approach, a bridge/wedge into one culture from another.  Why don't we ask those people how to lead the discussion ?  I guarantee you whatever comes out of that will not embolden mass killers.

In order to do that we have to ensure those people believe in a more moderate Islam, and many don't. My neighbor, for example, who was born here, but assures me that God demands women cover their hair and head and body from the view of other men, and who has never introduced me to his wife, despite how outgoing he is to me (proper Muslim women are not supposed to speak to any male not a relative).

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) If they are insular how can prodding from without help ?  There still may be reasons to criticize/discuss but the audience will be outside the group itself, which should mitigate the discussion in several ways.

2) This sounds like a practical approach, a bridge/wedge into one culture from another.  Why don't we ask those people how to lead the discussion ?  I guarantee you whatever comes out of that will not embolden mass killers.

1) I have no idea either.  We're talking about two distinct cultural bubbles, like Trump people and Clinton people, Habs fans and Leafs fans...

2) Censoring is telling other people to shut up.  I wouldn't do that at least directly.  I would ask "Why are you talking about this ?".  As with my dialogue with Argus above, asking people questions can release ideas.

But asking why are you doing this with the criteria for doing it being instigating change doesn't make sense to me.  We are just arguing amongst ourselves.  At least the two ladies we were discussing might have an effect for the positive.  Regardless, they should be supported fully for their efforts.  It can't be easy. Hirsi Ali's colleague was stabbed to death for such efforts, if I remember correctly.

Edited February 4, 2017 by bcsapper

[Michael Hardner]

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

 

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

In order to do that we have to ensure those people believe in a more moderate Islam, and many don't. My neighbor, for example, who was born here, but assures me that God demands women cover their hair and head and body from the view of other men, and who has never introduced me to his wife, despite how outgoing he is to me (proper Muslim women are not supposed to speak to any male not a relative).

 

Well, you made referral to "actual Moderates" so I assume you have a definition that works.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well, you made referral to "actual Moderates" so I assume you have a definition that works.

An actual moderate would be one who relegated things like hijabs, niqabs, whippings and codified discrimination of women to the distant past. If I see a Muslim whose wife or teenage daughter is wearing a t-shirt and shorts on a hot day, and he's okay with that, I'll figure he's probably a moderate.

 

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

An actual moderate would be one who relegated things like hijabs, niqabs, whippings and codified discrimination of women to the distant past. If I see a Muslim whose wife or teenage daughter is wearing a t-shirt and shorts on a hot day, and he's okay with that, I'll figure he's probably a moderate.

1

How would you know they were Muslim if the women weren't wearing a hijab?   Maybe for every hijab wearing woman you've seen, you've seen 10 or 100 moderate Muslims.  

[Argus]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

How would you know they were Muslim if the women weren't wearing a hijab?   Maybe for every hijab wearing woman you've seen, you've seen 10 or 100 moderate Muslims.  

Given the Pew survey shows more than half of Muslim women in Canada wear the Hijab ( as opposed to about 40% ten years ago)  I think that's unlikely.

Edited February 4, 2017 by Argus

[Moonlight Graham]

“We have to win a war of ideas, because ideas cross borders,” said Harris

This is exactly right

[The_Squid]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

Given the Pew survey shows more than half of Muslim women in Canada wear the Hijab ( as opposed to about 40% ten years ago)  I think that's unlikely.

 Equating the hijab with the niqab is silly. It's just a head scarf. 

[?Impact]

4 hours ago, Argus said:

Given the Pew survey shows more than half of Muslim women in Canada wear the Hijab ( as opposed to about 40% ten years ago)  I think that's unlikely.

Do you mean the Environics survey?

I also noted that it said that more Muslims had respect for other people compared to respect for Canadian culture than non-Muslims. Non-Muslims seem to cherish Canadian culture over respect for other people. 

[Argus]

16 hours ago, The_Squid said:

 Equating the hijab with the niqab is silly. It's just a head scarf. 

And the purpose of that head scarf is what?

 To Muslim men, ensuring their women dress modestly and keep away from other men is necessary to preserve their own honor.

In Khaled Hosseini's soul-piercing novel A Thousand Splendid Suns, the character Nana, a poor unwed mother, tells her five-year-old daughter, Mariam: "Learn this now and learn it well, my daughter: Like a compass needle that points north, a man's accusing finger always finds a woman. Always. You remember that, Mariam."

Hosseini's novel is about life in Afghanistan, but in the 30 words above he sums up the way men govern the lives of women across most of the Muslim world. Like Mariam, millions of Muslim girls are told very early in life by their mothers that their place in society is one of submission; submission, not to God, but to man.

This ownership or possession of Muslim women by the men in their families was summed up best by professor Shahrzad Mojab of University of Toronto as "the crude Arabic expression that 'A man's honour lies between the legs of a woman.' "

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/tarek-fatah/honour-killing_b_1133349.html

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by Argus

[dialamah]

^^^^ Much like slut shamers in contemporary western society and those who ask "what was she wearing/doing" when a woman is raped, or those who object strenuously if a woman is appointed to a government post under the assumption that she's not worthy, if only because a man was available.  Sure, women in western societies aren't expected to wear a headscarf to demonstrate their humility, modesty and submissiveness, but the message is still out there for them, loud and clear.