• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

Islamism Manifesto, The new Totalitarianism

Genesius

TRIBE Member
An article published in a number of european news papers.
Signed by 12 Writers/Intellectuals/Politicians...The link at the bottom has mini-biographies of the signees


MANIFESTO: Together facing the new totalitarianism

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.

We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all.

The recent events, which occurred after the publication of drawings of Muhammed in European newspapers, have revealed the necessity of the struggle for these universal values. This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the ideological field. It is not a clash of civilisations nor an antagonism of West and East that we are witnessing, but a global struggle that confronts democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarianisms, Islamism is nurtured by fears and frustrations. The hate preachers bet on these feelings in order to form battalions destined to impose a liberticidal and unegalitarian world. But we clearly and firmly state: nothing, not even despair, justifies the choice of obscurantism, totalitarianism and hatred. Islamism is a reactionary ideology which kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. Its success can only lead to a world of domination: man's domination of woman, the Islamists' domination of all the others. To counter this, we must assure universal rights to oppressed or discriminated people.

We reject cultural relativism, which consists in accepting that men and women of Muslim culture should be deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secular values in the name of respect for cultures and traditions. We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of "Islamophobia", an unfortunate concept which confuses criticism of Islam as a religion with stigmatisation of its believers.

We plead for the universality of freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit may be exercised on all continents, against all abuses and all dogmas.

We appeal to democrats and free spirits of all countries that our century should be one of Enlightenment, not of obscurantism.

12 signatures

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Chahla Chafiq
Caroline Fourest
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Irshad Manji
Mehdi Mozaffari
Maryam Namazie
Taslima Nasreen
Salman Rushdie
Antoine Sfeir
Philippe Val
Ibn Warraq

http://www.jp.dk/indland/artikel:aid=3585740/
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Genesius said:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Chahla Chafiq
Caroline Fourest
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Irshad Manji
Mehdi Mozaffari
Maryam Namazie
Taslima Nasreen
Salman Rushdie
Antoine Sfeir
Philippe Val
Ibn Warraq

http://www.jp.dk/indland/artikel:aid=3585740/
jews every single one of them!!!!!!!! ;)


the road to hell is paved with good intentions, in the name of respect and so call "anti-hate" laws we will gradually become a society that forbids or makes taboo critical or even uncritical discussion of religion.

this will be facilitated by our charter of rights and freedoms which has and will continue to increasingly dismanlte the very institutions it was supposed to protect such as free speech and universal health care.

it will be done gradually without fully realizing it, all in the name of enforcing the "right" beliefs.
 

Big Harv

TRIBE Member
judge wopner said:
jews every single one of them!!!!!!!! ;)


the road to hell is paved with good intentions, in the name of respect and so call "anti-hate" laws we will gradually become a society that forbids or makes taboo critical or even uncritical discussion of religion.

this will be facilitated by our charter of rights and freedoms which has and will continue to increasingly dismanlte the very institutions it was supposed to protect such as free speech and universal health care.

it will be done gradually without fully realizing it, all in the name of enforcing the "right" beliefs.
I wouldn't go that far - religious arbitration to settle marital breakdowns has been banned by the Ontario government; several papers and magazines printed the Mohammed cartoons and no charges were laid. Universal health care is still the guiding principle in crafting health policy. I think (hope) Canadians are balanced enough to recognize how rights balance against each other in different situations.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
Big Harv said:
I wouldn't go that far - religious arbitration to settle marital breakdowns has been banned by the Ontario government; several papers and magazines printed the Mohammed cartoons and no charges were laid. Universal health care is still the guiding principle in crafting health policy. I think (hope) Canadians are balanced enough to recognize how rights balance against each other in different situations.
stop being so reasonable.

with all your citations and real world examples!!!!!
:eek:

i find it though ironic that we tout religious freedom then ban reliiuos arbitration by 2 willing parties.

i think we inconsistanly apply these freedoms depending on their political leanings frankly.

yes some papers published it but which major one? they wouldnt touch it!!

i dont think canadians overall are capable of making balanced decisions w/ respect to these issues because there are so many canadians that lean to left or too right for my liking and their views are anything but balanced.

universal health care is just that: a word that isnt actualy anywhere true in canada. we have on balance more private funding nd payment of health care than the UK, France and holland. the idea that we "dont pay" for our health care the way they do in the US is equally based on myth and sophistry. the government has drastically reduced the services they cover under our health care plans all in the anme of savign what remains and increases our taxes for it.

couple that with the quebec supremem court decision which essentially drilled a hole right through our healht accord, and it is onlhy the beginin of the hollowing out of this system thanks to a charter challange!!!! ha fucking ha!!
 

DaPhatConductor

TRIBE Promoter
this article is a load of crap.

anyone who references the cartoon riots is a moron. they were totally spun out of control (and arguably incited by) the media. moslems have many other issues to rage about, they were taken advantage of and played like a fiddle.

also: it is not islam that is the problem, no more than christianity is the 'problem' with america.

this is racist hate trash.
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

Hal-9000

TRIBE Member
it's not an article, it's a declaration.


And you would probably do well to leave that little indymedia/in from the wilderness/alternet echo chamber that you get your information from and find out what people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali are about before you call them racist.
 

Gizmo

TRIBE Member
I don't think the signatories are using just the cartoons as evidence, they've all had previous experiences of getting into trouble with fundamental sectors of Islam due to some of their work. Whether the level of reaction they received from the Muslim world is warranted is another question all together.
 

zee

TRIBE Member
so shouldn't the manifesto really be against religious extremism and not specifically 'Islamism'?
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

DaPhatConductor

TRIBE Promoter
zee said:
so shouldn't the manifesto really be against religious extremism and not specifically 'Islamism'?
exaaaactly

calling 'islamism' 'totalitarian' and then comparing it to fascism, etc. is an overly sensationalistic and unfairly generalizing way to generate timely (ie preceeding war with iran) anti-Islam sentiment.

Islam is not so easily generalized, and the dangers of 'totalitarianism' are not limited to 'Islamism' at this time.

i think it's also worth mentioning that only around 10% of the world's moslem population are arabic, and many arabs are not.

islam =/= totalitarianism
moslems =/= arabs

...and so i repeat:

this artlicle is a load of fear-mongering hate trash, no matter how arabic sounding the names of the publishers are.
 

Adam

TRIBE Member
It should also be mentioned that:

islam =/= islamism

Islamism, by definition, is fundamentalism.
 
Last edited:

Genesius

TRIBE Member
DaPhatConductor said:
exaaaactly

i think it's also worth mentioning that only around 10% of the world's moslem population are arabic, and many arabs are not.
Hmmm... Really? I would like a source for that one. But maybe it depends on what you mean by arabic.
 

Genesius

TRIBE Member
DaPhatConductor said:
i got that statistic from a paper called "reel bad arabs" that i was given by the university of toronto in a psychology of the mass media course.

you can read it here: http://www.pineforge.com/healeystudy4/shaheen.pdf
Thank you. Too bad he doesn't quote his sources :(
At first I was really suprised at this statistic, but then in his article I'm reminded of Indonesia etc... One stereotype down for me!
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
DaPhatConductor said:
exaaaactly

calling 'islamism' 'totalitarian' and then comparing it to fascism, etc. is an overly sensationalistic and unfairly generalizing way to generate timely (ie preceeding war with iran) anti-Islam sentiment.

Islam is not so easily generalized, and the dangers of 'totalitarianism' are not limited to 'Islamism' at this time.

i think it's also worth mentioning that only around 10% of the world's moslem population are arabic, and many arabs are not.

islam =/= totalitarianism
moslems =/= arabs

...and so i repeat:

this artlicle is a load of fear-mongering hate trash, no matter how arabic sounding the names of the publishers are.
very true. and it remains a big misunderstanding about islam and arabs.

but:

even topical study of the mid-east and the histiory of islam shows that islams power centre lies in the mid-east, the most internationalist ends of extremist "salafist" type groups are dominated by mid-eastern muslims, and al-queda concerns itself primairly with mid-east issues before the secondary ones ie: american removal from Saudi arabia, isreal off the map, the survival of islam with its power centre in the mid-east.

afghanistan and other central asian states like pakistan and even indoneisa have long said they feel they are treated as 2nd class muslims before the arab-diaspora so to speak. and i wont even get into persians!!!

its a bit disingenuous to over internationalize islam as a way to deflect critisim against arabs/persians or teh mid east in general.

there are arab, black and asian catholics, but the power centre of catholosim and christianity for that matter are overwhelmingly among eurpeans/north americans of caucasian persuasian, and missionaries in 3rd world non-white nations are often critisized for being more instruments of colonialism or of western dominance than they are viewed as simple religious exchange. (the same way people refernce indonesia being muslim but neglect to read up on how islam arrived in the region, and if the intentions of islamicisng the region were more than simple religious earnestness, i always see the footnote for christian missions but rarely for the same for islamic states that were converted in simiilar ways just a lot earlier in history)
 

DaPhatConductor

TRIBE Promoter
the islamic power base is definitely in the middle east, and many of the most important moslems are arabic, i will totally agree with that.

what i do not agree with is the general thrust of this article.

it is very simplistic, does not back up any of its statements, and makes alarmist generalizations about an entire RELIGION without breaking the group into specific subgroups. this article basically calls on the reader to attack islam. that's not cool.

there is no 'not all moslems are bad', no 'not all moslems support islamism', or anything. it is pure hate, and it is signed by a bunch of people with arab ic sounding names in order to give the illusion that this is not what it is.

if you are going to make claims like 'islamism is the new fascism, let's kill em all' you have to provide SOME substance to back up your claim or else it's pure thoughtless hate mongering.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
DaPhatConductor said:
the islamic power base is definitely in the middle east, and many of the most important moslems are arabic, i will totally agree with that.

what i do not agree with is the general thrust of this article.

it is very simplistic, does not back up any of its statements, and makes alarmist generalizations about an entire RELIGION without breaking the group into specific subgroups. this article basically calls on the reader to attack islam. that's not cool.

there is no 'not all moslems are bad', no 'not all moslems support islamism', or anything. it is pure hate, and it is signed by a bunch of people with arab ic sounding names in order to give the illusion that this is not what it is.

if you are going to make claims like 'islamism is the new fascism, let's kill em all' you have to provide SOME substance to back up your claim or else it's pure thoughtless hate mongering.
the article specifically states "religious totalitarianism". which i agree with and there are plent of examples of islamic totalitarianism gone wrong.
it doesnt mean that every other governing style is without fault.

salmund rushdie is no stranger to the dark side of islmaic fanatism.,
the article is lacking some formal substance true but the writers are primarily arabs and muslims from intellectual circles not beodins wandering the desert, that does lend some credibility to their anger however poorly supported it may had been.
 

janiecakes

TRIBE Member
DaPhatConductor said:
'islamism is the new fascism, let's kill em all'
"This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the ideological field."

did you miss this? were you too busy jumping up and down like a big baby screaming 'HATE TRASH'?
 

DaPhatConductor

TRIBE Promoter
janie: no, i saw that, i was paraphrasing in an exaggerated manner to stir up trouble ;)

but honestly, how are we dealing with this 'ideological menace'?

not with words, that's for sure...

we're invading/bombing the crap out of their countries, torturing innocents, killing kids recreationally, fueling more terror/extremism, etc.

i mean, what kind of 'ideological solution' to 'islamist totalitarianism' is there proposed in this article? are the authors going to the middle east, books in hand, to educate the masses? no. they're writing articles that support the position that islam is the enemy, and saying that we all have to join in the struggle.

most people are going to take this to mean: 'islamism is the new fascism, let's kill em all'

honestly.

wopner: i don't care what ethnicity they are. that's all they have going for them in this article. ethnicity and status. if their argument doesn't hold together, i don't care who they are.
 
Last edited:
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
judge wopner said:
the article specifically states "religious totalitarianism". which i agree with and there are plent of examples of islamic totalitarianism gone wrong.
it doesnt mean that every other governing style is without fault.

salmund rushdie is no stranger to the dark side of islmaic fanatism.,
the article is lacking some formal substance true but the writers are primarily arabs and muslims from intellectual circles not beodins wandering the desert, that does lend some credibility to their anger however poorly supported it may had been.
i never thought id have to resort to this but mr. conductor, re-read my post because i dont think you did.

youre aware of some of the signed writer's backgrounds with respect to activism and persecution non?

for real, they spell it out: "religious totalitarianism" , and they are focusing on islamic totalitarianism to which many real life exampes exist of how this is indeed a threat.

they dont have to bring a solution to the table to point out the obvious. and their backgrounds do lend additional credibility to their statements.

dumb people will always mistake any statments made about topics, you cant always pander to the lowest common denominator. just because some idiots will mistake their comments as simply "lets kill muslims" it doesnt mean their point is invalid.

shit, everytime someone says the west is the source of the all the violence, an asian dude might mistake that to think all white people are devils!!!!!!!!!!!!

do a google on some of the undersigned and youll be surprised at their "backgrounds" and im speaking more than ethnicity.

J
 
Top