Spite

After rejecting the tribute of earth and water, Leonidas abdicates and goes to Delphi to tend the Oracle in peace for the remainder of his life.

Rozalia criticises Islam thread #765 I suggest all islam threads started by Rozalia are merged into one massive thread called "Guess what, I think Islam sucks - by Rozalia" and any further threads with exactly the same premise are banned from the forums.

You don't even get a vote Rozalia

>Still not converted to Dioism >2016

We don't elect the Chairman. They are called by Dio.

The intelligentsia has always been elected.

Don't come here with your facts Admodeus

CHANGE IS BAD /me stacks boxes in ascending order of size

The second great Dioist crusade commences!

If you manage to rub your braincells together enough to generate a point, I'll respond to it. Until then I'll just assume you're making stupid posts as a form of attention seeking, much like Captain Vietnam and lizard noob.

I'm guessing Tulip is going to remove himself from the gene pool then.

April fools P&W!

It's a false analogy though. Let me explain my opinion better through the magic of bullet points: - America is a Christian majority country with a strong Christian ethic. Therefore people there do not have to choose between a Christian ethic and an American one. - Christianity and Islam are fundamentally different in their attitude to politics. Whilst Jesus famously said "render unto caesar what is caesar's", Muhammad was a political leader and political leadership is part of his legacy. For islam, Church and state are one, and this makes islam in Western lands come into conflict with the state more frequently than Christianity (hence extremism) - nevertheless, most people who are actually evangelical Christians AND also radicals would tend to be Christian radicals, rather than socialists or whatever. I'm sure there are Christians living in the outback determined to introduce a socialist state to America or whatever but most terrorism in America is committed by extremists bombing abortion clinics or whatever. - Arguably the best evidence for this is that a country like the UK with almost no Christians (real ones anyway) has almost no Christian extremism. I think for anyone who is truly very religious, their radicalisation is going to go in a religious direction. Remember that the difference between religious ideology and all other ideologies is that for the most part people are indoctrinated into a religious ideology from a very young age. Going out and reading a lot of socialist literature may make you a socialist, but it's unlikely to make you a terrorist.

Amongst any group there are degrees of political activity. The lowest form of this is going out and casting a vote, then perhaps protesting, political activism, and highest of all I guess is revolutionary activism (and terrorism). I think if you look at a country like the UK, there are probably a lot more muslims voting, campaigning and participating in mainstream parties than anything islamist. However I don't count this as extremist behaviour. I see no evidence anywhere that there are extremist statist muslims. I don't even know how you could be an extremist "family" muslim.

You really are deluded. You made it clear you supported the idea of women staying at home and having children. Your idea that paying women to have babies and give them up for adoption is a good thing is frankly absurd and shows a real lack of understanding about people. And the group that support parties who are almost indistinguishable from myself (in your words) represent the vast majority of people in the country. The only people who aren't represented in that group are nutters like the BNP and the communist party, and lone lunies like yourself who are convinced they're right and everyone else in the world just can't see it.

As I said, I think in the West the identity crisis problem gives muslim youths something to rally around. They feel torn between being British and being "home country of parents". They feel in many cases isolated because of their differences with their peers, and therefore turn to other focal points for their identity. Islam is one of these - this is also why a lot of black youths in Britain convert to Islam (disproportionate numbers), because it gives a sense of identity. Considering we don't have sizeable communist movements and fascist movements (for obvious reasons) wouldn't want them, radical islam becomes attractive. In my brief sojourn into student politics I noticed this trend amongst Islamic students who were politically active. Whilst many vocal people were socialist, many more were very Islamic (if not outright islamists). On demographics of terrorists: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/aug/20/uksecurity.terrorism1 You can find the source document on torrent sites if you are interested. Most people become radicalised before the age of 25.

There's a difference between radical and reactionary. I will disagree with people who don't share my views of course. However I wouldn't call everyone who doesn't share them extremist. The vast majority of the population fit into the "centre ground" and though I might disagree with them I wouldn't say their views are extremist. You are trying to make yourself seem like you're part of the "normal" majority being persecuted by an "elitist" minority. In reality you are yourself part of a very small minority of people and have a very combatative viewpoint. As you've said before, you don't agree with any existing party. Politically, you're an outsider. You identify with radical political decisions, such as disenfranchisement of foreign born citizens, women being encouraged to be home owners, bestiality and polygamy being legalised, and many other points of view that are way outside the recognised norm for Western countries.

The old Paris attacker was 31, and most of the people involved were younger. The London attacks had two teenagers involved. Extremism is something which is mostly attractive to the young, for a number of reasons. Lack of education, the fact they're easily influenced, their feeling of invincibility or always being right, and a general anger at the system. It's something they mostly grow out of as they get older, because those contributory factors change them. As such the profile of the older extremist is different to that of the teenage extremist. Though they still tend to be uneducated and often unemployed or in low level work. If you're complaining because I said being a fascist or communist or islamist is childish, then get over it. I'm sure that there are many older people who hold those views, but for the most part extremism is a young person's game.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. It doesn't seem like you're responding to my post at all.

I was talking more about muslim youth in non-muslim countries. However if you look at the Arab spring as an example, I think it's clear that radical islamic groups (of various sorts) have attracted a lot more support than socialist groups or other radicals. The only muslim nation where socialist radicals are a significant factor is amongst the Kurds. Maybe you're going through this phase a little later than some I remember a lot of angry Tory kids shouting "Enoch was right"... it's two sides of the same coin politically. Extremism is something people go to when they feel that the current system (whatever it may be) has failed. Although people from a wide variety of backgrounds experience that feeling, in the West where most people have (relatively) good lives it is usually angry teens.

Yeh because the solution is to regress to the 19th century patriarchy rather than to support families with better childcare provision.

It's not a generalisation, it's a trite observance. Christianity and Judaism were both present in the Arabian peninsula in bastardised forms in the period that Muhammad was active. Assuming Allah didn't actually dictate the Quran to him (which is a possibility I suppose) the enormous amount of references to Jewish and Christian mythology, history, culture and ethics suggests that Muhammad learned these from another human, before putting his spin on it. Unfortunately he was illiterate and had no religious tutelage, so his understanding was pretty basic. With regards to radicalisation, I think that as I said it is something that always happens to young people. Revolutionaries the world over are usually young, or at least the cannon fodder is. The majority of islamists fighting in Syria are under 25 by all accounts. I'm not saying that all radical muslim youth choose islamism as their outlet (I knew a couple commie types myself), but it's certainly a trend. Which is what we call a generalisation when we want to sound smart.

Also, I'm not sure if your comments that women should all be home makers in the other thread was genuine or just rp, but that is very un-Marxist. I suggest reading "origin of the family, private property and the state", by Engels, where he explains at length that the capitalist system is designed to allocate reproductive (ie household) labour to women, in effect reducing their access to productive (paid) labour and therefore entrenching the capitalist system further. The workforce is therefore supported by a supply of free labour, increasing profits etc. Anyway, the struggle for sexual equality is very closely linked to the struggle for class equality and that was recognised by Marx and Engels from the start.

I do have a degree in political theory, so as far as anyone can understand such a text I'd say i do. However when I was thirteen I didn't care about the intellectual merits of communism, just that it was flashy and exciting and revolutionary. Radical islam is appealing to young people for the same reason. And fascism for that matter.