The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Demonising Islam > Comments

Demonising Islam : Comments

By Scott Richardson, published 2/2/2005

Scott Richardson argues that we should resist them and us dialectical analysis.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 15
  9. 16
  10. 17
  11. All
On "Osama" and "Kandahar" - after seeing these films I felt easier about ejecting the Taliban from Afghanistan
Posted by n0rm5kj, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:51:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It seems that enemies in conflict try to take the moral high ground. l believe this to be mere tonic for the masses, who can rationalise behaviour contradictions in comfort. We like to think we are morally superior. We like to deny human nature. We intellectualise. We live in denial and delusion that we are naturally civil. We try to forget that we are part of the animal world. That we are ruled more by emotions than by reason... fear and greed before facts and figures. Sure, l think that when we try, we are more good than bad. And that there is more good than bad in this wolrd. And most of us learn to moderate... until we get some form of power and control over others. Then our dark side emerges. 'Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.'

What l find intriguing is the exercise of putting oneself in the shoes of the 'enemy'. Very quick is the realisation that they feel like us and perceive us in the same way we perceive them. But for most, denial and delusion are comfortable and excellent tonics thru which to perceive.
Posted by trade215, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:57:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've been charged with intellectual drivel, the piece was originally written as an English Extension 2 Major work, so of course it has an academic grounding.

I agree that Al Qaeda are propagating Clash of Civilisations, the point of the piece (a point obviously missed by some) is that this dialectical way of thinking is used by everyone who wants to demonise a particular person or group, whether they be Islamic fundamentalists calling Christians ‘infidels’ or from Western writers.

The focus was on Western use of language to demonise, and of course it is something done by all sides. As soon as this is published Ben P notes that there is an 'Islamic habit' of referring to others outside their faith as 'infidels.' Thank you Ben for proving my point, you instantly thought about the 'other' demonising us. This is a two-way thing.

As for Rushdie's text being a work of fiction, anyone who has read the book and knows anything about Islam can see how thinly disguised the work is, just like Hardy’s Power without Glory.
Posted by Scott R, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 12:38:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hello All
“One of the recurrent ideas in critical theory is the notion that there is “no objective standpoint” and that “language predetermines what we see” and thus “reality” is a mere construction of language. French psychoanalyst, Jacques Lacan, theorised this in his notion of the “self” and the “other” in terms of identification. He stated that we know ourselves as distinct from others through language and other systems of representation. Language, as he puts it, precedes and determines subjectivity.”
If there is no objective standpoint and reality is a construction of language, then the above paragraph is meaningless, as it seems to be offering an objective viewpoint and describing reality, which you said doesn’t exist.
And…
“The gaps in the texts also, such as distinctions between literalists and moderates and the violence caused by the Christian crusades impact as much as what is said and contribute to an imbalanced, subjective account of history and society today.” This statement says that there is a reality which can be described, and therefore inadequate presentations could be unbalanced or subjective. However, earlier you asserted there is no objective standpoint or reality, so you can’t possible say what you just said. Simply put, you have contradicted yourself, as always happens to those who subscribe to the absurd but fashionable critical theory.
Best Regards
Geoffrey
Posted by Geoffrey, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 12:56:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I believe the author has identified a definite trait in the human condition “Western culture seems to have an ingrained desire to have a villain worth hating - the “other”.

This trait was identified in a more casual way by Steinbeck in his book “Travels with Charley” when he mentioned that America always needs an enemy, whether that enemy be the Confederates, the Japanese, the Communists, and now it appears several Islamic nations.

Of course these other “enemies” also need their “enemies” as well, but what of the average person born into that country. Originally they don’t hate anyone, but they can be conditioned to. A look at a number of Iranian web-sites for example reveals that they are people very similar to us, although many Iranian don’t like the extremes of the Mullah

In the more immediate term, an on-line petition can be signed for a young Iranian girl condemned to death in Iran.

The Web-site is
http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/index.shtml

And the on-line petition can be signed at
http://www.petitiononline.com/leilaa/petition.html
Posted by Timkins, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 2:14:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It wasn't to long ago that whenever I heard an Irish accent, especially in an air port terminal I wondered if the bloody IRA had landed. Now I worry about islamic terrorists, whenever I see a moslem male or female in their dress - costume whatever I am a little perturbed.As I would be if I saw a uniformed nazi SS officer on the street in 1940. Sorry but I am human and I want to live my allotted number of years so I take some note of my fellow beings, those in the frame at this time are moslems. By the way a fictional story or not Rushdie was more correct than incorrect. Mahammod was a 'suspect' trader, he was brutal having slain other Arab tribesmen As well as Jewish traders with their women and children, unless he or his followers wanted to "use" them.He did marry a nine year old girl, as moslems can today. You see moslem girls are more mature? so they are to pray,fast and keep moslem teachings from the age of nine, boys from the age of - would you believe fifteen. Because nine year old girls are so mature then they are ripe for a DOM to marry them. He also invented the 'hudna' which means that he or any moslem could sign a truce with an enemy. The enemy thinking that it was a lasting truce but in moslem eyes it was a temporary truce until they were strong enough to repudiate it, this hudna can and is used today. Moslems are allowed to lie to unbelievers, Christians, Jews, athiests or any other non moslem.I have read more islamic books than many others so I know a little. Regards, numbat
Posted by numbat, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 3:17:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 15
  9. 16
  10. 17
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy