Spuck-uk
Banned
thisss
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Jonathan Pie on the Manchester Bombing & Theresa May
- Thread starter Hux1ey
- Start date
thisss
curiouscharles
Member
nailed it.
also whiner-poster-boy, most English people are "well spoken", meaning they understand how to use rhetoric on a much higher level [generally speaking] than other English speaking nations [and one especially in particular].
love Jonathan Pie, although this isn't his best rant, i always appreciate his insights as i'm never quite able to keep up with UK news as much as i'd like [too much to follow these days!].
gutter_trash
Banned
I understand that Liberals try to be all-inclussive and accepting and all but c'mon; there must be a serious discussion among Liberals and Social-Democrats about religious extremism.
There is no defense for ignoring religious extremism in fear of offending religious minorities.
Communities, law enforcement and legistlators must crunch and come up with a solution to combat extremism with positive reinformcent at whistleblowers.
There is no defense for ignoring religious extremism in fear of offending religious minorities.
Communities, law enforcement and legistlators must crunch and come up with a solution to combat extremism with positive reinformcent at whistleblowers.
Frozenprince
Banned
And what universe do you live in where we haven't been slagging on Muslim people for the actions of extremists since 9/11? Seriously. "We need to have this conversation and damn their feelings" we've been having this "conversation" for twenty years no with no results.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
This is even dumber than the video haha. Bravo.
There's a disconnect with the reality we're living in and your perception of it. Like for real, what on earth is going on? It's slightly alarming.
gutter_trash
Banned
Saudi Arabia got off scott free without reprocautiouns for their involvement in 9/11
Frozenprince
Banned
This literally nothing to do with what you've been arguing.
That's geopolitics, not "protecting Islam".
Might do some good to read up on OPEC. Who's teet the US is finally decoupling from because we now are producing enough of our own crude to no longer need total dependence.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Cool.
We should talk about it, but why only about Islam and why pretend it's only because of religion?
I mean, he doesn't even bother to try and attempt to delve into the extremely complicated and layered reasons for why we're facing terrorist attacks and immediately jumps on Islam and how we need to have an honest debate...
We should talk about it, but why only about Islam and why pretend it's only because of religion?
I mean, he doesn't even bother to try and attempt to delve into the extremely complicated and layered reasons for why we're facing terrorist attacks and immediately jumps on Islam and how we need to have an honest debate...
NoblesseOblige
Banned
There's a difference between discussing the cause and effect of religious extremism and blatant disrespect for all people who happen to share a belief. The person this thread is about is interested in doing the latter, not the former. Many liberals are willing and do discuss religious extremism so I'm not sure what rock you've been living under.
Frozenprince
Banned
At this point I'm waiting for the Tamil Tigers to get brought up.
Makes as much sense as anything else we've been talking about.
Makes as much sense as anything else we've been talking about.
I couldn't agreed more. I would define myself as a regressive leftist 2 years ago and it was by watching Carlin, Hitch, Bill Maher and Dawkins that made me less tolerant towards religion than I were.
Religions are in their core conservative and anti-liberal and should be fought against with secularism.
By that I mean, Im attacking the beliefs and ideas that comes from Islam, christianity, judaism etc, not the people themself. I mean, if a christian or muslim does something terrible and they say it's because of their religion/god, then I attack both them and the religion.
What is this? This is beyond stupid. Do you really think the Anglo-phone conception that English people speak more eloquently comes from actually usage as opposed to a heavier association with the upper class? As to your last statement, I'm guessing you're taking a dumb pot shot at Americans, but this argument has its roots in a blatantly Anglo-centric attack on the Scots and Irish, and, though to a much lesser extent, the Welsh. It's dumb and you should feel bad about drawing on it in 2017.
That's a minor issue at best. Besides even if, and I'm somewhat partial to the idea, religious ideology plays a role, acknowledging that wouldn't be very useful. Unlike changing domestic and foreign policy to deal with other issues, like addressing racism and poverty, there isn't really anything that could feasibly be done about religion. Focusing on religion is useless for actually solving the issue, and actively harmful in that it makes people feel like they have casus belli to attack muslims.
gutter_trash
Banned
amen brother,
we may not agree on NATO and the EU but we do agree on what Liberalism should be: secular
Jonathan Pie is the epitomy of the 'both sides' white dude who chastises minorities for speaking up againt oppression, who blames the rise of fascism on feminists, who thinks coddling bigots is the way forward, and who would rather defend the ability of nazis to flourish than protect the safety of others.
And he's definitely not the person to listen to when it comes to handling the complex challenge of multiculturalism in an age steeped in fascist leanings and racial resentment at an all-time high.
And he's definitely not the person to listen to when it comes to handling the complex challenge of multiculturalism in an age steeped in fascist leanings and racial resentment at an all-time high.
How do you feel about people doing something terrible and then saying it's because of liberalism? Do you immediately essentialize the failure to the ideology? This is a lazy way of looking at things.
gutter_trash
Banned
Liberalism in Europe is secular
Liberalism in the Anglosphere is blind to religious conservatism and extremism
This is not an answer to the question at all, and you'll find not particularly true. Also aren't you a Canadian liberal?
Your argument in this thread is all over the place, and I'm not sure what you're getting at besides saying religion is bad in a number of different ways with a bunch of disjointed, flimsy arguments.
gutter_trash
Banned
I am a Canadian Liberal, yes. But I don't agree with everything on LPC's platform.
an individual can support a party on 75% of the issues and disagree with them on 25% of them.
I disagree with the defense of Conservative Religions that are Anti-Liberal.
What does this even mean? This is incredibly vague. Also how do 7th century politics play into this?
I'm not saying they can't. I certainly don't support any party 100%. I was just pointing out that's a weird hot take on the Anglosphere's public sphere to come from a Canadian.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Well the poster lists Maher as an influence, I don't know what you expect...
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
that has nil to do with any of what either of you is saying.
yeah i normally like his input on various things but this one seems a bit reactionary. i don't mind the basic point that we should all talk about whether religion causes terrorism or not (it's kind of obvious that it does) but the way he says it, it's more like 'but it IS islam's fault though' when i think it's really more complicated than all that.
I don't think anyone says "In the name of nothing!" before doing something terrible.
Yeah, it's very terrible that Maher dislikes Islam and calls it a shitty religion because of anti-liberal, anti-woman, anti-lbgt and anti-free speech views.
Frozenprince
Banned
Ardent angry athiests always manage to steer their anger towards shouting at the wind.
It takes internal change to change a religion. Screaming at their organizations and members and decrying them as the antithisis of liberalism is never going to work.
It takes internal change to change a religion. Screaming at their organizations and members and decrying them as the antithisis of liberalism is never going to work.
Monty Mole
Member
I like some of his videos but he's not saying anything clever, new or different here, just more of the same. Perhaps he hasn't heard of LBC if he thinks everyone is being quiet and lighting tea lights.
Frozenprince
Banned
You're not answering his question.
You seem to be intentionally misunderstanding what I wrote. I didn't mean taking liberalism as a god. I meant doing something negative because of liberalism as an ideology, which is clearly something that has happened.
gutter_trash
Banned
me and fantomena are on opposite sides on trade, NATO and the EU.
I'm more Clinton-ian while fantomena is more Corbyn-esque when it comes to EU and NATO.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Like I said... laziness in putting forward arguments is pretty much standard operating procedure for Maher and his zealot followers.
he's a left wing guy so probably not. the world is built of echo chambers now, neogaf is one of them whether people think it feels true or not. it's a fairly uniform left wing place. i don't like this video but that much is a point the left needs to at least be conscious of because it is turning otherwise amenable people against us.
He's a comedian. And what do you mean with lazyness?
Well then the person who does something terrible is a disgusting maniac who should be put behind bars. Then I would need to find out what idea the person got from liberalism that made the person do what this person did and find out that this idea need to be attacked and reformed/changed.
I guess context is part of this.
Or not drawing cartoons because it will upset somebody and they are not mature or civilized enough to not go on a killing spree and kill people because of that.
And after that having some people always implying they deserved that, because you can not hurt the feelings of religious people because hurt feelings are the worst.
And yes, that is only one religion people have to be afraid to draw cartoons would actually be enough but even saying it that is the worst, because cultural relativism and all that crap.
I have no idea what Corbyns views are on NATO and EU. Im anti-EU, but "not-sure" on NATO. One side of me says we need NATO, another side dislikes the bombings NATO has done.
Fun-fact: The general secretary/leader of NATO was anti-NATO.
I'm sure you are saying the same thing when Republicans pass anti-gay laws based on their religous beliefs.
i think it's actually time to 'have the conversation' about islam because i think a lot of people just flat out don't understand it is all. once otherwise reasonable people feel like their questions have been heard and answered they will probably calm down about having a conversation. cos i think it is true that it doesn't do to just say 'you're an asshole for bringing that up'.
Frozenprince
Banned
Republicanism is not based on a singular book of beliefs. Ratified and brought forth through faith. It's based on doctrinal beliefs on government policy and changes.
Moreover. Much like religion. Yes. Internal change is the only way they shift. It's why there are multiple off shoots in both politics and religion.
But of course you know that.
plagiarize
Banned
Why are Muslims in the west more likely to be sympathetic to ISIS than Muslims in the middle east?
I think that's less to do with military intervention and more to do with the kind of rhetoric the Pie character is using here.
I think that's less to do with military intervention and more to do with the kind of rhetoric the Pie character is using here.
Frozenprince
Banned
Which. Again I would like to point out.
Is what ISIS WANTS.
By doing this crap you are quite literally letting the terrorists win.
There are a lot of issues with this. Most obviously lots of people that have done horrible things in the name of liberalism are clearly not maniacs in the sense of having some sort of mental issue. Looking at politics in the nineteenth century. Secondly, since you've seemed to acknowledge that if someone does something and are connected to an idea then the idea needs to be investigated, why are you weighing Islam in particular so highly to investigate? There are plenty of ideologies, in fact I'd say almost every single one, that have negative aspects, there might be something more going on here with a focus on Islam than pure utility.
Do you think peoples' plan to deal with homophobic laws is to yell at Republicans until it is fixed? It seems pretty clear to me that in practice very different strategies have been used to help marginalized people.
And internal change has never happened, at least partly, because of external pressure?
You are really comparing not getting married or getting a wedding cake at some bakeries with getting whipped up to 7000 times or stoned to death?
Frozenprince
Banned
.
Frozenprince
Banned
I've been beaten and know people who've been beaten half to death by Christian's because of our sexuality.
I don't automatically just assume all Christian's are evil because of that.
You're making an equivalence that doesn't exist.
I don't automatically just assume all Christian's are evil because of that.
Political pressure is different from pressure on a religious group.
You're making an equivalence that doesn't exist.
plagiarize
Banned
Well, I wouldn't say 'win' but certainly helping their cause.
They aren't going to win.
I don't think that argument will work with this crowd though. On GAF you're going to be dealing with people that are more committed to the idea that religion, very nebulously defined, is bad more than the idea that it is Islam in particular that is problematic.