Which was influenced largely by the antisemitism of the West and the rise of Zionism for Jewish people which is partly radicalization as a response to thousands of years of oppression. But Brits were still in power with colonialism in full force.
I had it but really had to scroll to the bottom. It was also not Reddit but articles saying it was the first result. Which is kind of ironic.
And criminalization of civil society is in general thriving in many European countries including France.
deleted by creator
They are a Salafi Jihadist group but they had their own idiocy added to Salfism which in itself has roots in Wahhabism.
I realized later that’s what it sounds like. I am not defending the act itself. I have spent a lot of time criticising it myself. What I am trying to do is to frame it into context. Bible is not without its pretty heinous acts. What I have an issue with is that people frame Islam, Christianity and Judaism in completely separate contexts. It is no less insane to convert to Christianity than Islam. Both are problematic and all three are built on each other literally. IMO based on religious texts Islam is better but that doesn’t mean it is without significant faults. There are buts like with Aisha. Otherwise, I would have converted already.
People forget that countries, cultures, religions and people are not as simply understood as Islam bad. That would make my work easier. But religions are a complex mixture of all with a side of history. For example, both Christianity and Judaism also require veiling yourself as a woman but few do. I haven’t really met a Christian who doesn’t wear polycotton. And as few that don’t eat crustaceans. Not even Catholicism nor Orthodoxy require either. But Bible does.
Fundamentalist thought processes have been pretty widespread in Islam for the past half a century. But they are not also explainable with just Islam bad. A lot of it is overcorrection because of imperialism. Some are about the far-right which while Islamophobic carries a lot of commonalities with fundamentalists of all types. And some are about religion. It is a potent mix and is used by a lot of populists globally. While there is a lot to criticize, it is often mischaracterized. Which makes me sound like I am defending the faults. I am not and should have framed better.
deleted by creator
That is not how the majority of Muslim women who wear hijab of their free will see it. Often it is framed in you hide what is most important to you. For Muslim women who have to wear hijab and do not want to it is seen as a tool of oppression. The difference is choice.
We are past second-wave feminism for the most part. If you can choose what you want to do, it is OK to choose traditionally feminine things. I am not Muslim. But I love kids, cooking and cleaning. It is OK. I can be more than one thing.
deleted by creator
Only one brand of fundamentalist Islam is exported from KSA. There are a lot of brands including ones brought from Iran and Afghanistan not to mention whatever ISIS was doing.
deleted by creator
Especially given this context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibmsdJ5R0b0
Islam as religious text basis doesn’t really differ in a bad way from the other two Abrahamic religions. It even gives some extra rights to women that Christianity and Judaism don’t. Forcing hijab on women is also expressively banned in Islamic theological texts. Doesn’t change how it works in practice as forced hijab is pretty common in fundamentalistic Islamic theocracies. But might explain why converting is a little bit less insane than at the surface level. If I had to choose one of the Abrahamic religions on a purely theological basis I might end up choosing Islam. Please note, I am not trying to give a pass to Islam, Islamic countries or especially fundamentalist Muslims. The issues are myriad. People outside Islamic countries just have a somewhat skewed image of the religion. Both in theory and practice.
Islam doesn’t encourage any more for theocracy than other Abrahamic religions. The existence of religious fundamentalist Islamic theocracies is a lot more complex than Islam. A lot of it can be traced to colonialism, the decolonization process and Western interference in Islamic countries. This is largely why Iran is one of those. The last Shah was seen corrupt autocratic puppet of the West by many. As a counter to it, the country over-corrected and landed in fundamentalist Islamic theocracy. Radicalization of Islam leading to similar governments happened in other Islam-majority countries. Before the 60s and 70s, many Islamic countries didn’t differ a lot from Western countries when it came to social liberties. There are a lot of images of Tehran and Kabul with women in mini skirts for example.
While I am not saying that modern Islamic countries are not problem or thousand when it comes to civil liberties and democracy, Islam in my knowledge was more tool and less reason behind it.
While I agree strongly with the latter statement I have a lot of reservations with the former. I am incredibly happy for her. But this decision as has been the case most of the time in the past decade with the exception of Ukrainian refugees is a decision on an individual level instead of an institutional one. There are a lot of people who are either asylum seekers, people with asylum or quota refugees with similar situations and danger levels. Making individual decisions leaves them behind and only aids one person. Basically, it is good PR with limited results increasing already existent inequality among refugees in Spain.
While Israel is part of the cause of Islamic terrorism in Europe, I think we should not pat too much on our backs. Yes, our countries’ positions taking sides on Israel is problematic as hell and so is us being tied to the US in the minds of many people outside Europe. But so is our own Islamophobia. I get where it comes from, but othering and sidelining people will lead to further radicalization. Which for people whose Islamophobia is rooted in current oppression in many Islamic societies, is entirely opposite of what they want.