Ahmadinejad’s ‘mature democracy’: reply to Andy Newman
Posted on Wednesday 30 December, 2009
Filed Under International
HOW would you define a ‘mature democracy’? Would a government that restricts the right to stand in elections solely to candidates approved in advance, and even then regularly stuffs ballot boxes, deserve the designation in your book?
What if you were told that the state in question was an open theocracy which consolidated its hold on power through the execution of tens of thousands of communists and other leftists, at a conservative estimate?
Would it affect your judgement if you were further informed that in the country we are talking about, independent trade unionism is not allowed, and homosexual acts sometimes attract the death penalty?
If you see yourself as a socialist or a liberal, would you pen a leftist apologia for a ‘mature democracy’ that has in the last few days killed at least eight pro-democracy protestors and arrested several key opposition leaders?
Blogger Andy Newman – main writer on Socialist Unity, Britain’s most widely read far left website – would. Thanks to his cadre Marxist background, he can see through the smokescreen of ideology generated by the bourgeois press, designed to dupe the impressionable into misguided solidarity with the victims of the dictatorship in Iran.
It’s their own fault they are corpses. The stupid bastards didn’t seek the ‘dialogue and compromise required for a peaceful win-win resolution’ with Ahmadinejad’s ‘mature democracy’. Read it all here.
The spooky thing is the way that Newman’s long and unnecessarily prolix screed transposes the arguments that Stalinists and even some orthodox Trotskyists deployed in decades past in defence of the Soviet Union and its satellite regimes.
Readers with long enough memories will find many claims in the piece strangely familiar. There is the contention that while the system under discussion is obviously not democratic by our standards, it can – by chop-logic yardsticks – be classified as democratic in a different way; standard liberal criteria do not apply.
Oh, and the economy works to the advantage of the poor. Any amount of evidence adduced that points to the enrichment of the elite is by the by here.
Newman notes that ‘general subsidies have been a big part of the welfare state in post-revolution Iran’, risibly painting Ahmadinejad as some kind of Persian Polly Toynbee.
He thereby forgets that all modern states have some kind of welfare element. He might as well maintain that Hitler operated a pretty neat job creation programme, and offered soft loans to unusually fecund German mothers.
Given the centre of gravity in Marxist thinking in the past, it is just about possible to see where Uncle Joe’s fellow travellers were coming from. But somehow a man politically formed in the one far left tendency that above all others resisted this chain of thought has ended up as a compagnon de route of repressive political Islam.
Let’s dispose right way of the inevitable canards that will surely be thrown in my face. I am opposed to military intervention in Iran by any imperialist power or any imperialist proxy. Nor does opposition to Ahmadinejad imply backing for Mousavi.
Elementary Marxism suggests that both represent opposing factional interests within the same ruling class. So we are duly reminded by Newman that ‘progressives need to avoid a simplistic polarisation between different strands of elite opinion both of which are disadvantageous to the mass of the population’.
That’s a bit of a contradiction, given the way in which he is plainly aligned to Ahmadinejad’s ‘populist and redistributive social welfare policies’.
But we should take our guidance from the Iranian left on this one; you know, Andy, the people you ostensibly uphold as co-thinkers. They are on the streets, participating independently within the broader Mousavi current.
In need of some wriggle room, Newman opts for the famous ‘in so far as’ tactic. ‘In so far as’ the protestors wish to change some of the ‘more oppressive aspects of Iranian society’ and stick to demanding such things as union rights, they can be completely supported. Presumably the less oppressive aspects of Iranian society are fair enough. Newman does not say under which category throwing students off tall buildings can be classified.
Many of Newman’s other positions will astound anyone aware of the revolutionary Marxist tradition in which he was formed. Revolution ‘might mean civil war’, Newman points out. Nobody who has read a few history books will doubt that.
Hilariously, he blasts the Mousavi opposition for its resort to ‘extra-constitutional means’. One shudders to think what he would have made of that naughty boy Lenin, or even the early 1980s Labour Party soft left, which advocated ‘extraparliamentary action’.
The clincher for Andy is that Ahmadinejad has the armed forces on his side. Dictatorships generally do, mate. You are politely referred back to Engels for the Marxist position on ‘bodies of armed men’, comrade.
Newman’s conclusion? The western left should avoid ‘trite cheerleading’ in support of the Mousavi tendency. What we need is to be trite cheerleaders for Ahmadinejad’s ‘mature democracy’ instead, he seems to suggest. I think he is wrong.
<<Go back
Comments
77 Responses to “Ahmadinejad’s ‘mature democracy’: reply to Andy Newman”
I’m too young to know much about what Portugese fascism (and if that term is correct at all, somehow, I doubt it) – to know much about what the Portugese dictatorship was like before it collapsed in 1974.
But Andy Newman claims it was worse than Iran or Zimbabwe now. At least, when he writes that
both the Fascist dictatroship in Portugal and the Pahlevi regime were politically and socially bankrupt.
In contrast, Ahmadinejad has support of roughly half the population, the officer corps in the army, and the basaji militia.
The more likely comparison is modern Zimbabwe.
I assume that he is claiming that he is against “politically and socially bankrupt” regimes, and that Portugal and Persia under the Shah were such, and therefore he views them negatively, and that Zimbabwe and Iran now are not, and he views them positively. He views the Iranian election outcome as being free and fair, certainly, and can only assume that Zimbabwe is equally democratic.
I did ask on a comment on his blog – fairly politely – how he exactly meant this. But he deleted it.
Nice.
I’m too young to know much about what Portugese fascism (and if that term is correct at all, somehow, I doubt it) – to know much about what the Portugese dictatorship was like before it collapsed in 1974.
But Andy Newman claims it was worse than Iran or Zimbabwe now. At least, when he writes that
both the Fascist dictatroship in Portugal and the Pahlevi regime were politically and socially bankrupt.
In contrast, Ahmadinejad has support of roughly half the population, the officer corps in the army, and the basaji militia.
The more likely comparison is modern Zimbabwe.
I assume that he is claiming that he is against “politically and socially bankrupt” regimes, and that Portugal and Persia under the Shah were such, and therefore he views them negatively, and that Zimbabwe and Iran now are not, and he views them positively. He views the Iranian election outcome as being free and fair, certainly, and can only assume that Zimbabwe is equally democratic.
I did ask on a comment on his blog – fairly politely – how he exactly meant this. But he deleted it.
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=5051#comment-172793
Nice.
By the way, all of that up to and including “The more likely comparison is modern Zimbabwe” is a quote from Newman’s article.
Western lefties can yap as much as they like about Iran, but they might as well be discussing the merits of the members of ‘Girls Aloud’ for all the influence they are likely to have on events in Iran.
The present political setup in Iran is not to everyone’s taste, but there are some points to be considered.
Firstly, Iran is in a bad neighbourhood; the place can’t be judged by the standards of Canada or Denmark.
Far more importantly for those Iranian citizens of non-Shia faith, living in a stable dictatorship like Iran or Syria has its indisputable good points. Jews and Christians and their property are – by and large – safe. It is true that Jews are emigrating steadily, but the same is true of the Jewish communities of India and – more significantly – of South Africa.
I write from a Middle Eastern despotism with far fewer freedoms than Iran currently possesses.
Well, I am very clever and am educated. I am a white British man. I am quite mature, but please don’t call me old. Dictatorships aren’t that bad actually, and you know, those types of people that live in them can’t cope with anything else. Democracy is a complicated thing and only for the likes of me and you. Though not for you, as you’re all lefties and don’t understand it either. Actually, democracy isn’t all it’s made out to be either, you know. Regardless: I write from the Middle East, and I bet none of you do. And when I say that no-one gives a damn about what we say, that doesn’t apply to me. My theories on the Spice Girls, and Bros beforehand, all bore fruit. I knew which one was Lezzer Spice, I knew that Bros would survive when only the brothers were left and the other one had left. So I knowz what I is saying, and I rulez. Consult Old Corr’s Almanac on his views on Girls Aloud. It’ll all come true. Sue R: now it’s your turn to support me.
Andy Newman’s piece is in error on one important point of fact.
The Israeli airforce can hit targets in Iran and return without American air-to-air refuelling assistance; the Israelis had no trouble reaching Tunisia and returning to base.
#
Isn’t it about time for a new international of progressive parties and organisations led by countries such as Iran, Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Zimbabwe, and with supporters e.g. from this blog, Die Linke, the Parti de Gauche, the Workers Party (Ireland), Respect, the CPB, etc.?
We could all achieve so much more together than just writing on blogs.
Comment by An appeal for unity — 30 December, 2009 @ 2:57 pm
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=5051#comment-172801
Does the inventor of the Corr-o-mat Opinion Dispenser feel I ought to take a week off?
Kidding apart, who said that elections are a step too far for Middle Easterners?
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=74094&d=3&m=12&y=2005
There ARE elections of a sort – with a very limited franchise – in Jeddah, even if the last one was marred by a little punching-and-pushing-and-shoving low-level violence and rather unseemly bribery at the polls [very like the fine Hogarthian scenes in England before the Great Reform Act] but the dreadful fact is that the ruling class throughout the Middle East is justifiably apprehensive of the instability elections can cause.
Compare and contrast Algeria under Boumedienne with what followed the election result which was thwarted by the General Staff – who rationalised what amounted to a coup by pointing to the Islamic Salvation Front’s assertion that once the Islamists succeeded in getting their hands on political power there would be no need for elections thereafter.
Well said comrade.
Andy Newman is completely out of his depth.
I was deeply involved with the Portuguese left, during the Carnation Revolution, and can say that they are major problems comparing this situation with Iran.
Don’t kbnow where even to begin.
We are we comrades (Green lizards under Wood Green Tube) listen to differnt voices.
As the French resistance song goes,
“Moi j’ecoute Radio HOPI.”
“I think he is wrong.”
Well said Dave.
Tho id have been tempted to put it stronger – fuckwit that Newman is.
Andy Newman is a Stalinist – he’s not a Marxist – and he hangs on every bit of nonsense that falls from Galloway’s politically compromised lips. His politics are about as sound as Mark Perryman’s i.e. crap.
They’re getting worked up about a comment or two on the SU thread over at Harry’s Place. Sadly the wrong comments, but that is a bit predictable as well.
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/12/30/fifth-time-as-farce
Surely we’ve been here before?
Throughout history certain individuals have been drawn to support despotic regimes or make excuses for ‘strongman’ rulers, such as Stalin, Franco, etc
Part of the excuses given was that they didn’t know the level of atrocities carried out by these dictators, as there was no Internet, communication was difficult and news coming out of these regimes came slowly.
Clearly, that doesn’t apply in the age of the Internet and YouTube, as Iranians in Iran, post clips of state brutality almost on a daily basis.
Not forgetting the Show Trials, which are currently going on in Tehran, and are covered in the state media.
So I don’t think it’s a question of evidence I think there’s some deeper problem here, as to why certain individuals are tempted to excuse the awful activities of these regimes.
I think this type of issue is partly psychological, how years of capitalist indoctrination means that some individuals are drawn into a cult of admiration for hierarchy and leadership even on a sub-conscious level, so these dictators (Ahmadinejad, Stalin, etc) appear appealing and in need of admiration.
I don’t think that’s a full answer either.
Equally it could be ‘ends justify means’ thinking that people like Newman picked up during his decades in the SWP, which means essentially taking a line and then defending it with all and anything, no matter how absurd or illogical.
Still I’m not sure that even fully explains the inanity behind Newman’s article,
It could be even simpler, just taking a reflective anti-Western approach combined with a bit of vulgar anti-imperialism, where any enemy of the West is somehow seen as worthy of support, no matter how vile or in Ahmadinejad’s case how racist.
Still whatever the thinking behind it, it surely marks a decline in British socialist thinking, that onetime radicals, such as Newman, are now apologists for the vicious state machinery in Iran.
Sadly, I doubt he’s alone in this type of thinking, which might explain why the Left in Britain isn’t doing too well.
I think Andy Newman’s piece may have been prompted in part by this considerably better article from Lenin’s Tomb, showing that it’s perfectly possible for Marxists to both oppose any Western attack on Iran, and stand with those fighting in the streets against an oppressive state.
Unlike Nooman at “Socialist Unity”, at least Lenny “Seymour” Tombstone is unequivocally on the side of the protestors, even if (for some unaccountable reason) he allows the stooge/agent Yoshie not just to comment, but to post on his horrible “Tomb.” Nooman, over at “Socialist Unity” isn’t even clearly in support of the protestors, while not quite having the guts to simply follow his instincts and support the regime: this increasingly degenerate Stalinist seems to want to have it both ways ways.
Oh, and how about the following hilarious (but also seriously worrying) comment on ”Socialist Unity”:
“Isn’t it about time for a new international of progressive parties and organisations led by countries such as Iran, Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Zimbabwe, and with supporters e.g. from this blog, Die Linke, the Parti de Gauche, the Workers Party (Ireland), Respect, the CPB, etc.?
We could all achieve so much more together than just writing on blogs.
Comment by An appeal for unity — 30 December, 2009 @ 2:57 pm ”
Talking of Stalinists and totalitarians, we must never forget the Graun’s resident public school stalinist Seumas “Posh Boy” Milne who has a typically revolting column today
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/dec/29/decade-global-crimes-crucial-advances
which for some reason doesn’t mention Iran alongside China, Russia and the Iraqi and Afghani “resistance” in its list of progressive world forces… but we know where “Posh Boy” stands from his comments back in June:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/dec/29/decade-global-crimes-crucial-advances
I particularly liked the public school-educated Posh Boy’s description of the Iranian protesters as “gilded youth”…
Once a tankie, always a tankie. If Hitler came back these guys would love him – he’s a agaisnt Zionism and US Imperialism, he’s for the welfare state – even a form of socialism! they’d say, before meeting any and all criticisms with ” Well we can’t choose the politcis of our allies” and “well you have to respect the will of the people, he was democrapically elected after all.”
If that’s the voice of the Left then we’re in the deepest of shit.
Well, I found Newman’s article perfectly innocuous, and it would take a big stretch of the imagination to read it as an apology for ” the vicious state machinery in Iran”. This post, and the comments, just seems like a bit of gratuitous spite against a competitor for blog ratings.
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/12/30/fifth-time-as-farce/#comments
Jim: see the comments. It was a joke comment. But unlike the serious ones Numan didn’t delete it.
Top post Dave. Good to see you end the year on a high.
If Newman’s views are in any way representative of mainstream far Left thinking then they’ve got their collective heads so far up their arses I really don’t think there’s any hope anymore. At lest not from that (rather small) part of the political spectrum.
For what it’s worth the people of Iran deserve our full, unconditional support against that fly-ridden regime. Here’s to their victory in 2010.
Happy New Year to you and yours Dave and to the few remaining good souls out there. I’m going outside.
“http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/12/30/fifth-time-as-farce/#comments
Jim: see the comments. It was a joke comment. But unlike the serious ones Numan didn’t delete it.”
Sorry: I didn’t realise it was a joke – mainly because such a comment would fit in fine on “Socialist Unty”.
Nooman now regularly deletes all my comments – while telling his readers what I’m supposed to have said, and why he’s deleted me! Nooman’s “reasons” include the claim that I’m a “racist” and that i’ve threatened him with “physical violence”…the man is either simply an out-and-out liar (my favoured expanation)…or he’s seriously disturbed. Either way, his political and personal. moral degeneration fom the SWP to Galloway and Stalinism continues apace.
Newman’s morally repulsive positions become more bizarre and indefensible by the day. His incoherent and often contradictory statements defy and kind of logical analysis. He’s way beyond concerns about evidence, rationality or fair debate.
It’s hard to know what’s driving his politics beyond simple opportunism and short term expediency. He now operates at a moral and intellectual level that makes the average steel plated, ocean going tanky look like a paragon of moral honesty.
It’s a repellent performance. I suspect the best response is to simply veto his ridiculous blog. Any reaction is simply grist to the mill, and any reasoned argument is soon labelled as personal abuse, racism, sinophobia, or whatever.
I suspect the guy has some serious personal problems, and the SU site is really some kind of peculier, quasi-therapeutic arena for Newman’s unique psychopathology.
“Would a government that restricts the right to stand in elections solely to candidates approved in advance, and even then regularly stuffs ballot boxes, deserve the designation in your book?”
Except Ahmedinejad didn’t stuff ballot boxes, where’s your evidence that he did? A US based opinion poll predicted a 70% vote for him weeks before the election. All the rest is hype.
Today’s pro-Ahmedinejad demonstrations were overwhelmingly form the non-twittering working class and the placards were written in Farsi rather than the English preferred by the Rafsanjani mobs.
Bill Corr-o-mat: I’m afaraid I can’t agree with you over Bros. Sorry.
Back in the 1930′s, some people used to excuse Hitler.
They were -quite rightly – interned as pro-Nazis at the start of WW2 (so were some people who shouldn’t have been, I know).
Now, “notsogreen” says:
“Except Ahmedinejad didn’t stuff ballot boxes, where’s your evidence that he did? A US based opinion poll predicted a 70% vote for him weeks before the election. All the rest is hype.”
“notsogreen” should have to answer for his anti-working class, pro-fascist posturing. Not very much, because it is just posturing, but pay he should. At the hands of the international working class.
Back in the 1930′s, some people used to excuse Hitler.
They were -quite rightly – interned as pro-Nazis at the start of WW2 (so were some people who shouldn’t have been, I know).
Now, “notsogreen” says:
“Except Ahmedinejad didn’t stuff ballot boxes, where’s your evidence that he did? A US based opinion poll predicted a 70% vote for him weeks before the election. All the rest is hype.”
“notsogreen” should have to answer for his anti-working class, pro-fascist posturing. Not very much, because it is just posturing, but pay he should. At the hands of the international working class.
I remember well the fascist dictatorships of Spain and Portugal collapsing and their former colonies falling into chaos. I recall the hope the left had of replacing them with their version of dictatorship, they almost did. The people wanted democracy and got it. The Iranian democracy is a farce. As long as the religious idiots call the tune then Iran will move onwards towards oblivion. Some of the left in Britain have lost the plot. They are a wannabee dictatorship hanging on to the skirts of Islamic headcases.
Newman’s choice of language is always revealing. He borrows the most cliched phraseology from domestic political discourse and rehashes it out of context. Hence Iran is a ‘mature democracy.’ A meaningless term deployed by every political hack in the UK to refer to ‘our’ hollowed out version of spectator democracy. How it applies to Iran only Andy Newman knows.
Newman’s polemics always come across as a strange hybrid of TUC/Neo Labour double think and old Stalinoid boiler plate propaganda, all topped with a shiny veneer of post-modern bullshit.
The good news: his blog is dying on its arse, with less than a dozen comments on most threads.
“My enemy’s enemy must be my friend” doesn’t often work in real life. Why do so many on left fall into this trap and align themselves with some of the worst regimes and movements in the world?
You just have to look at the SWP’s support of Taksin Shinwatra’s return in Thailand. He is probably the closest we have got to another Mussolini in recent times.
“”notsogreen” should have to answer for his anti-working class, pro-fascist posturing. Not very much, because it is just posturing, but pay he should. At the hands of the international working class.”
Good god, I thought this was just a blog, not a fucking tribunal.
Andy Newman is hopeless. He thinks China is a workers’ paradise when it is a dictatorship without free trade unions, that kills and imprisons innocent people on a regular basis. If that’s socialism, count me out.
Our age simply doesn’t look kindly on dictators or dictatorships, no matter how slickly the product is packaged and presented.
The Castro Gang still have their loyalists in the U.K. media and TUC, of course, and there are a few MPs willing to give Chavez the benefit of the doubt, but the mental atmosphere in these days of instantaneous communications is very different from what it was well within the living memory of someone now old but not senile.
In the prewar days my mother attended Gypsy Hill Teacher Training College [now part of Kingston University] and in later years she recalled how popular authoritarianism was among young women who were training to be the next generation of teachers. Il Duce, Mussolini, – admired for his Marlon Brando masculine looks – was by far the firm favourite, with Franco in second place. There were grave misgivings about Herr Hitler, understandably, and my mother couldn’t remember more than a couple of very proletarian girls having kind words about Stalin.
Bear up, Jim Denham. One doesn’t need to try too hard to fall afoul of the brutal censorship on the SOCIALIST UNITY blog. At least Nooman can’t send one on an island holiday, like Marshal Tito could and did.
Dave, your bit about students being thrown from tall buildings is offensive and inflammatory. Care to cite that event? As for the rest of the post, I enjoyed the writing style, little else.
Those curious about who funds the very slickly-run ISLAMOPHOBIA WATCH site can e-mail the people there and ask directly:
editorial@islamophobia-watch.com
When Ken The Newt ran London he was – allegedly – subsidising ISLAMOPHOBIA WATCH with public money [you may be ceratin that no such public funds would have been forthcoming for a TERRORISM WATCH or IRA-FRONT-ORGANISATION WATCH site] but Ken is mercifully out of power and Boris, that escapee from Sesame Street, is on the job these days.
So WHO bankrolls ISLAMOPHOBIA WATCH ?
Great article David. Thank you. These SWP reactionary post-colonial incoherent and reductionist leftists should be exposed for what they are. I am ashamed that at one point in my life, I took them seriously.
Iranians do not need friends like SU or the SWP. Not after they supported repression in Iran for 30 years. Not after they apologized time and time again for Khomeini/Khamenei and his henchmen.
Iranian democrats will destroy Islam and expose their socialist supporters.
NotSoGreen: Except Ahmedinejad didn’t stuff ballot boxes, where’s your evidence that he did? A US based opinion poll predicted a 70% vote for him weeks before the election. All the rest is hype.
You mean when half the stations did not have opposition voting monitors and the other half had their monitors kidnapped or intimidated, and when NO station received the approved signature of the opposition monitor – and you have the gall to call that a democratic vote that AhmadiN won?
With Stalinists like you, the Islamic fascists have little to apologize for.
“Iranian democrats will destroy Islam and expose their socialist supporters.”
“Democrats” want to “destroy Islam” ???
I’m sure you’ll find plenty of idiots on Dave’s blog who will support that now it has become the poor man’s Harry’s Place but as a political slogan for Iranians it is total ultra left insanity.
adam: Dave, your bit about students being thrown from tall buildings is offensive and inflammatory. Care to cite that event? As for the rest of the post, I enjoyed the writing style, little else.
There is a video of it on youtube in a protest event in October 2009. And no it was not produced in a studio in Virginia.
4 students are shown handcuffed and blindfolded thrown from the roof of a 2nd story dormitory. One lands on his head.
“defamatory” ?? You mean defamatory to the Basiji death squads? What a stalinist dolt.
This practice started in 1999, and continues to this day. The building has been as tall as 5 or 6 stories. It has been captured on videophone. It has been widely reported.
Eddie Truman – I guess you Trots surely enjoy your cozy relationship with Islamic theocrats and lousy Mohammedan religious fascists. Islam is a gutter religion and Mohammed was a pedophile racist. Why would any democrat, much less Iranian democrat, not destroy this lousy ideology and backward religion?
Unless of course they are a trotist or stalinist hobnobbing with Islamists, trying to ride their coattails to power. Will not happen though – Khomeini executed his leftists helpers between 1980 and 1988. Give up on this dream Eddie.
Well well, someone who describes themselves as a “democrat” then launches into a hate filled diatribe including describing Mohammed as a “pedophile [sic] racist”.
There’s nothing “democratic” about you whatsoever, you’re just another promoter of hatred on the internet.
You’ll be quite at home here though, you can join the collection of racists, fascists and idiots that infest the comments.
Someone has to stick up for the Prophet Mohammed on the pedophilia [US] / paedophilia [Br] issue, so I shall.
It is generally accepted – by friend and foe alike – that Aisha and Mohammed commenced carnal relations when Aisha was nine.
While the very idea might be appalling to the likes of Esther Rantzen, some nine-year-old girls DO have a very strong sexual awareness. Some especially naughty ones are known to make the first move, too. Ask almost any reasonably observant primary school teacher!
According to the teachings of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, meticulously translated into many languages, nine is a perfectly acceptable age for a girl to have sex with her husband.
Those interested in the issue might care to read Nabokov’s preface to his novel ‘Lolita’.
There!
That disposes of the issue quite satisfactorily!
Now that Eddie Truman is one this thread of this site, he might care to tell us whence the brass cometh to run ISLAMOPHOBIA WATCH.
Its a fact that the filthy Mohammed screwed 8 year old Aisha. Its a fact that he massacred entire tribes.
There is nothing more idiotic than a pomo leftist denying well-known facts because it does not fit with his simplistic ideology.
So what is wrong with hating Islam? I am a muslim apostate, but that is besides the point, isn’t it?
Obviously you hate freedom of speech, and freedom from religion. that makes you a reactionary anti-enlightenment bigot and tool of the identity fascists.
So before you run away unable to argue the point, please hint to me what is racist about denouncing Mohammed the assassin and mass murderer? What a half-moron and intellectual retard that the best you can do is invent some PC rule (thou shalt not criticize Islam only) and use that to throw personal insults at the entire group of people here.
ERRATUM:
“Now that Eddie Truman is on the thread of …”
For ‘one’ read ‘on’
=====================================
Q: What did the Buddhist say to the hot dog vendor?
A: Make me one with everything.
Bill Corr, except that Prophet Mohammed claimed that he was god’s representative and all have to submit to him and emulate him with absolutely no dissension. He claimed his word was eternal and was the last word. He said his followers must implement his word at the threat of the sword. His life and words have been immortalized by his followers and used on unsuspecting children and the illiterate population as a bludgeon to keep them in line and to exploit them.
So Mohammad has been the infallible idol of billions for quite a few (14) centuries.
He has to be held to a higher standard and his inhumane acts must be exposed for all thinking beings to see.
So you are wrong to compare Prophet Mohammad to the ordinary 67 year old Abdullah baazaari who happens to take a lust on one of his peasant’s girl. And since when has Ay. Khomeini become the standard for ethical behaviour. As an Iranian I find that funny (and demeaning).
Dave,
Eddie Trueman has a point about the comments on your blog, I have found this last 12 months they have got increasingly sectarian!
People have compared Iran to Zimbabew:
http://www.jconline.com/article/20091230/BUSINESS/912300325
Will the Zimbabwe Central Bank ride to the rescue of the Ayatollahs?
Bill – somewhere I recall a comment that atimes.com (Inter Press Services), owned by this neo-fascist anti-West Chinese high-tech billionaire, is bankrolling Islamophobia Watch.
This going by memory, and at best is just a rumor.
john – can you explain if a Muslim apostate and hater of Islam criticizes the assassin Mohammed, in what way is that sectarian (please define)?
Like could you tell me what are the rules about critiqueing Islam (or any religion) and its filthy child molesting founder (or any founder)?
And where does your rule come from – please provide backup ethical justification. Thanks
Just like a typical anti-enlightenment pomo leftist, Eddie Truman spilled his PC venom and promptly disappeared – so confident in his own superiour righteousness and intentions. What a loser and a dimwit.
@ Mohsen, I was attending to the needs of my 2 eldest granddaughters, I’m not one of those who has the time to waste arguing with idiots on the internet but then I don’t see that there was any point that you made worth replying to, your stock in trade is just more hatred and abuse.
If you are genuine about wanting to build a better world based on human compassion and understanding, how do you intend to win over the 1.3 – 1.8 billion Muslims in the world when you express such hatred towards them ?
I agree with Eddie and John above and someone else who made a similar comment yesterday, that this blog is heading way downhill due to the “collection of racists, fascists and idiots that infest the comments”
I think the blog owner needs to decide whether he wants comments here from Lefts, such as myself (maybe he doesn’t) or the aforementioned – as, for me, it’s going to have to be one or the other.