Re: The Truth About What The Palestinians REALLY Want


"Steve Goldfarb" <slg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fhhkee$2mo$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In <0t-dnedZKbtbKqbanZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@xxxxxxx> "Dan Kimmel"
<daniel.kimmel@xxxxxxx> writes:

Um, no, I'm not.

Um, yes, you are.

That's your opinion, Dan. I think you're the one playing word games,
trying to muddle all these meanings together instead of treating distinct
words distinctly.

That's interesting because -- quite honestly -- that's precisely how I see
what YOU'RE doing. You taking a word ("fascism") which is wholly
inapplicable, and trying to bend and twist it so that you can apply it to
Islamic extremists.



I would presume that if you asked Bin Laden, he'd tell
you that he doesn't want to hurt anyone -- if everyone would just
convert
to Islam as they are supposed to then everything would be fine. People
are
only getting hurt because they're fighting the natural order of things.

You're kidding, right? This is the guy behind 9/11, you understand?

He would probably say something like "you have to break eggs in order to
make an omelet." Why? Because, like in Mussolini's document, he does not
value the individual. That's a fascist POV. He's willing to kill
individuals in order to "fix" the State. Just as any fascist is.

But he's NOT trying to "fix" the State. He's trying to *destroy* it and
replacing it with an Islamic regime. Hmm, replace "Islamic" with
"Communist" and bin Laden is just like Stalin or Mao. So it sounds like you
should be calling him an "IslamoCommunist" after all.


It's only in comic books where people wake up and decide to become
super-villains. Everybody else thinks he's on the side of the angels,
no
matter how many people he's forced to torture and kill.

That's another issue entirely. Bin Laden clearly INTENDED that many
Americans die in the 9/11 attacks. It wasn't like they were given the
choice "convert or be killed."

We were, though, in his mind. As a group. He's not thinking about
individuals.

That's your theory. I'm not convinced. His goal is to *destroy* the West,
not "reform" it. That's the difference between someone like Gandhi, who
wanted freedom for India not the destruction of England, and bin Laden, who
DOES want to destroy his enemies.


You've said that, but that doesn't make it right. I've provided support
for my position, all you've said is I'm wrong because the word
"fascist"
just means "evil." But that's not true. The word "fascist" does NOT
just
mean "evil," despite your insistence.

No, it's not my insistance, it's yours YOU are using it to mean "bad
form
of government." Actually, it would be more correct to say your are
MISusing
it.
Fascism is a particularly philosophy of governing. It is NOT about
imposing
a particular religion.

Ah, but it is! Read Mussolini's document. He speaks of the "State" in
explicitly religious terms.

Yes, he's turning the *state* into a *religion*. Bin Laden's goal is the
exact OPPOSITE. There, you've just demonstrated once and for all that
"fascism" ought not be applied to the Islamic extremists.



Sez you. You assert that it doesn't apply to Islamic extremists, but
you've provided no support for that assertion other than simply
repeating
it.

To the contrary, you've done nothing to show that these Islamic
extremists
want to impose a *fascist* state. All you've done is show they want to
impose *Islam*. Simply asserting that wanting to impose Islam MAKES them
"fascist" doesn't prove your case.

They want to impose a state in which individual rights are subordinated to
the needs of the group.

Sounds like Communism.

When they believe this for themselves, it's a
religion. When they wish to impose it as state policy, i.e., implementing
Sharia as the basis for government, then that's a political POV - one
which is very, very similar to that proposed by Mussolini and labeled
"Fascism."

No, not at all. It remains a *religious* point of view. Control of the
state is to advance their *religion*, NOT the other way around.

Presumably not all members of the Muslim religion wish to
impose Sharia as civil law, thus not all Muslims are Fascists.

Indeed, it's unlikely any of them are.

However,
presumably all believing Muslims believe that their needs as individuals
are subsumed to the over-riding goal of the group, the "Umma." Thus, that
view isn't an "extremist" view.

No, nor is it a political one.

I know you don't accept Wikipedia, but in a footnote they have a cite
to a
pamphlet by Mussolini himself. Is that authoritative enough for you?

Not so different.

Completely different. It focuses on the power of the STATE, not of the
religion. You've just proved that the Islamic extremists are NOT
"fascists."

Did you read it? He very explicitly casts this idea of "State" in
religious terms. From what I understand of the Muslim idea of "Ummah,"
he's talking about the exact same thing.

Did YOU read it. Fascism's goal is state power, and having people put their
religious fervor into support of the POLITICAL leader and his power. That
is NOT what Islamic extremism is about. It's goals are diametrically
opposed to this. It wants the state to be *subservient* to RELIGIOUS power.
Look at Iran or Saudi Arabia. These are not fascist states. They are
ISLAMIC states.


BTW, let me just interject something -- I appreciate that not everyone who
uses the term Islamofascism necessarily means it the same way I do, and
it's certainly possible that some do mean it in the way you're talking
about, to cast all Muslims as Fascists. As I've said before, IMO the term
actually DISTINGUISHES those Muslims who are fascists from those who are
not. That is, to me an "extremist" is someone who just "takes it too far"
while a something-Fascist is creating a new thing out of their old thing.

To say that another way, "extremist beliefsystem" is still "beliefsystem,"
but "beliefsystem-Fascism" is external to it. That is, if I'm a member of
beliefsystem, then my objection to the extremist isn't that his ideas are
wrong, it's just that I object to his methods. With a
beliefsystem-Fascist, though, I can disagree with him entirely, and, say,
suggest that our preferred political system ought to be
beliefsystem-constitutional democracy for example.

And it's all for naught. You are misusing the word "fascism" which clearly
does not apply here.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Truth About What The Palestinians REALLY Want
    ... any term yet -- you haven't defined terrorism, fascism, or extremism. ... Communists, Fascists, and your so-called "Islamic extremists" are ... Islamic religion, or at least force them to change their religion such ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: The Truth About What The Palestinians REALLY Want
    ... "fascism" ought not be applied to the Islamic extremists. ... I think Communism is a specific type of Fascism. ... with "the people," while in Fascism it's this state religion. ... but "beliefsystem-Fascism" is external to it. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: The Truth About What The Palestinians REALLY Want
    ... because he wanted to destroy the prior Italian state? ... "fascism" ought not be applied to the Islamic extremists. ... It's saying religion *serves* the state. ... I think Communism is a specific type of Fascism. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: Jesus Camp
    ... masses of children to support militant rightwing christian fascism. ... those children amounts to child abuse IMO but their parents are within ... harmed because the parents have the freedom of religion, ... and i'll venture to say that the vast majority of American Christian ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • Re: Jesus Camp
    ... masses of children to support militant rightwing christian fascism. ... those children amounts to child abuse IMO but their parents are within ... harmed because the parents have the freedom of religion, ... Presently many of these churches are largely in bed with the ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)