The people on the far right that do these Quran burnings are idiots. Luckily they are a tiny percentile. When they tried to get into parliament in Denmark, they only got 1% of votes. At least these demonstrations are non violent, because peaceful democracy allow expression of personal opinions.
On the other side we have Muslims who are fanatic religious idiots, protesting these burnings in violent riots, despite they are happening in far away countries, who have different laws and traditions. They prove that the demonstrations of burning the Quran in opposition to Islam because Muslims are fanatics and unfit for democracy, actually kind of have a point.
The right-wingers who did this weren’t stupid, in the end. They knew it’d provoke exactly this reaction, and that it earns them extra voters the next time around.
There won’t be any extra votes next time, Rasmus Paludan had done this already, and although it had an effect, he only managed to get half the required 2% votes to get to parliament. Since then he has become ever more irrelevant here. Which is probably why he tried the stunt in Sweden too.
despite they are happening in far away countries, who have different laws and traditions
I mean, when Paludan did his stunts up here in Sweden, people rioted, attacked police, and burned cars here too. I believe it got calmer with subsequent burnings but the one down in Norrköping was quite gnarly.
Yes that was crazy, but slightly more understandable than people in Iran or some other Muslim country protesting a fringe right wing activist in Denmark or Sweden.
because Muslims are fanatics and unfit for democracy, actually kind of have a point.
i am glad that people are starting to wake up and understand that islam is more of a political ideology than a religion.
they’re doing it out of pure hatred towards other people
I would take away the veracity from these statements (because ultimately people can change and Muslims are not a monolith) and I’d say I agree. There is definitely a political aim of the Muslim religion, and us westerners should be rebuking the illiberal aspects of Muslim adherents. It’s one thing to support a Muslim’s choice of religion, it’s another to think it’s okay to give up another group’s freedom because Muslims want to prescribe their beliefs.
More generally, religion is inherently about exercising control. It’s always a political ideology on a state level, because that’s what religion was always about. There’s a reason heads of state were usually with a church’s blessing, and said blessing could be taken away.
Christianity is no better in this regard as an example, and while on a microscopic level each individual religion can be more or less a problem in each particular situation, it’d do well for us as a species to grow up and get past our need for Santa Claus in general.
As an exmuslim i just want to say thank you. i am glad that people are starting to wake up and understand that islam is more of a political ideology than a religion.
I get the sentiment, but don’t thank far-right groups for anything. They’re not doing it to “free the people of the dangers of religion” they’re doing it out of pure hatred towards other people (specially since most far-right groups are religious themselves). Even if you’re not a muslim anymore, they’ll probably find something else to hate you (and me, and most people in the world, actually).
There aren’t any differences between political ideologies and religions
Capitalism and Communism can be classified as religions, as much as Christianity and Islam can be classified as political ideologies
The prophet of Capitalism is Adam Smith, of Communism - Karl Marx
The ideological leader of Christianity - Jesus, of Islam - Muhammad
That is incorrect.
Political ideologies have goals. For instance to improve living conditions for the working class, or maximizing economic efficiency. The policies are then formed around achieving those goals. A political ideology is also Democracy, which guarantees everybody a right to express their opinion without fear of the current government.
Religion is dogmatic wishful thinking without evidence, and generally 100% authoritarian, and opposite to democracy and suppress free expression.
I beg to differ. Religions have goals too, they’re just focused on the inner aspect of mankind, more so than material conditions like Capitalism and Communism.
And I don’t see why you brought up evidence. What evidence are you talking about? Neither conventional religions (like Christianity and Islam), nor conventional political ideologies like Capitalism, Communism, and as you said Democracy (among other things, like different organization types like LLCs, the advent of Nationalism, the Founding Myth of The Nation, or even the Nation-State), don’t exist in the natural world. They’re false realities, imagined realities in the minds of billions of people. People believe in them because other people believe in them.
Belief, and, yes I used that word correctly, in the principle of say, “the invisible hand of the market”, or “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” or that “all people deserve equal treatment”, or that “free speech is a human right”, or “human rights” in general, or, the most famous example - “money”, aren’t things that exist in the natural world. People have created these things in their minds as much as they have created the image of an all-powerful (or not), benevolent (or not) Abrahamic, Hindu, or whatever God and/or Gods. There is no evidence of either in the natural world.
Religion is dogmatic wishful thinking without evidence in the natural world, as much as any political ideology is dogmatic wishful thinking without evidence in the natural world
Humans are very little more than upright animals (if that) with just extremely creative imaginations and very complex social patterns
Sorry for being rather nihilistic about this, but if you (not talking specifically about you, but people in general) haven’t connected any of these imagined realities (i.e what we conventionally refer to as political ideologies or religions) to your personality or have a vested interest in them, you would see that they aren’t dissimilar to each other in any real meaningful way
That is quite wrong, tbh. Unless you assume that market agendas are based on belief in a higher authority. And while you can say “the prophey of capitalism is adam smith”, they’re not prayed on. Importantly this robs capitalism on the higher authority angle that religious fanatics of all religions use to justify heinous acts.
Of course, such acts still happen without any religion in the picture. As always, the grass can be wet without it having rained, it’s just that most of the time it happens due to rain.
Please check out my reply to the other person above
