Why Pakistani liberals will always fail

I wrote a longish post on Aasia Bibi which I summarily deleted.

Pakistani liberals are a toothless lot because they dare not challenge the best itself, Islam. There is no peaceful Islam, like any other man-made ideology it becomes cancerous when not checked.

One could accuse me of hypocrisy because I’m a Bahai. However it so happens that my religious body isn’t sanction death sentences on innocent women. If it did I would be equally scathing.

Unless Muslims stand up, attack Islam and have the freedom to call Mohammad a pedophile (whether he was one or both) in central square Mecca without any fears of retribution from either State or individuals, there can be no respite in the taming of Islam.

The Tory Party and Republicans instinctively understand this which is why all Hindus, Sikhs & non-Muslims familiar with Islam must vote with the Right.

I am very upset about the Aasia Bibi case and I find the response of Pakistanis of it to be simply bullshit. Shame on them and shame on Pakistan and shame on me.

4+

63 thoughts on “Why Pakistani liberals will always fail”

  1. “There is no peaceful Islam”– This is too much of a generalization. There is no one Islam, just as there as no one Christianity etc. The vast majority of the world’s Muslims are just going about their business and their religion helps them to be moral people. They are not interested in imposing it on others. Of course, there are extremists who make life difficult for everyone but extremism exists in all religions. There was a time in history when Christians took accusations of blasphemy very seriously and sometimes reacted with violence. Europe has moved on from that now while the “Muslim world” has not.

    There is no need for anyone to “attack” Islam, just as there is no need to “attack” any other religion. Why can’t we all just respect each other’s sacred beliefs?

    I agree with you that Pakistani liberals are in a difficult position because you can’t really criticize religion in a religiously-based state. Islam is part of the core identity of being Pakistani. But the problem is not so much religion but rather violent interpretations of it. Liberals are among those criticizing the mob violence we have seen in Pakistan over the past few days and the government’s giving in to many of the protesters’ demands. The reaction to the verdict was definitely shameful. Of that there is no doubt.

    0
    1. Name a Christian/Hindu/secular/Buddhist state that has the equivalent case of Asia Bibi.

      Let’s not equivocate; Islam has a unique problem and Pakistani liberals are playing a double game.

      Where are the rampaging Mirpuri crowds in Britain demanding the Pakistani government free Asia in the way they did for Satanic Versess?

      No Pakistani or Muslim liberal has any credibility until they show their commitment to Asia / Human Rights over their religion.

      Until they do that all argumentation is hollow..

      2+
      1. Blasphemy is a big problem in Islamic societies. Other cultures have other problems.

        I don’t believe Islam has a “unique problem”. Pakistani liberals are doing the best they can under the constraints of their society.

        The Supreme Court acquitted Aasia Bibi. Most reasonable people can agree that she suffered from a great injustice. Unfortunately, many Pakistanis are so radicalized that they will continue to believe that she insulted the Prophet (peace be upon him) despite the court’s verdict. There are serious problems in Pakistan. No one is denying that.

        I find the overall tenor of your comments to be a bit Islamophobic honestly. Majoritarian societies have many of the same problems. To single out one religion is problematic, to say the least.

        0
          1. Islamophobia is bigoted and disgusting.

            Getting “hysterical” is not going to help Aasia Bibi. Nor is making claims that only the right wing understands the problems with Islam.

            I agree with you that the reaction to the verdict was shameful and the government conceding to some of the radicals’ demands was even worse. But these are structural problems in Pakistani society.

            0
          2. Islam is not the problem, but certain interpretations of Islam. Comments like “Islam is the problem” or “Christianity is the problem” etc come across as rather bigoted.

            Anan asks why Pakistan is more radicalized today than in 1920 (a rather arbitrary starting point). The answer I think has to do with General Zia and his “Islamization” policy. Also with Saudi’s funding of certain hardline interpretations of the religion. Finally, the Pakistani state uses Islam in order to unite the people and get them to stop thinking of themselves as various ethnic groups and instead think of themselves as Muslims and Pakistanis. The state doubled down on this strategy post the loss of East Pakistan. Can’t say that it has really worked, but the powers that be felt it is better that people think of themselves as Muslim than as Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashtun etc.

            0
        1. “I don’t believe Islam has a “unique problem”. Pakistani liberals are doing the best they can under the constraints of their society.”

          The phobia to free art and thought does seem to be uniquely Abrahamic.

          Why are Pakistanis so much more radicalized today than in 1920? Is it because of KSA’s influence?

          “Majoritarian societies have many of the same problems” Not necessarily. The United States, Canada and India do a much better job protecting the freedom of art, speech and thought of their muslims.

          “Islamophobia is bigoted and disgusting.” What is Islamapobia? Islamaphobia is a way for nonmuslims and extremist muslims to attack reasonable muslims. Somehow most of the people attacked as Islamaphobes are reasonable muslims.

          “Getting “hysterical” is not going to help Aasia Bibi.”

          We are agreed. Wow, I agree with Kabir more than anyone else on this thread (other than Razib). How interesting.

          0
      2. “Name a Christian/Hindu/secular/Buddhist state that has the equivalent case of Asia Bibi”

        Looks like there is somewhat equivalent in India in the sabari mala case.

        Here also Supreme Court allowed women of child bearing age to enter the temple; but still not a single woman could enter due to hooliganism of a section of hardliners.
        Hardliners are everywhere.

        0
        1. Pranjal, I am excerpting part of the article “Hinduttva (b)” [still in process of writing it]:

          “In the below discussion Anjali George discusses why the Indian supreme court has forced the shut down of the ancient Sabarimala temple. Sabaramila is a brain therapy facility where woman and girls send their dysfunctional boys and men to–in order to fix them. To join the program and visit Sabaramila temple boys and men had to practice a very rigorous difficult 40 day regiment. Because most males are stupid fools, their woman and girls would:
          —gently persuade them to join [who are we kidding, in some cases girls aren’t that gentle and intimidate their men and boys into joining]
          —help them complete the regiment [in eastern philosophy and Toaism intelligence (medha) is female and males aren’t that bright, which is why they needed the help of their girls and woman]
          —keep a much more luxurious temple for themselves, a woman’s Sabrimala if you will.

          Eastern philosophy is a matriarchal system of the divine feminine. Woman and girls run things. Woman and girls set up a brahmacharya Ayyapa tantra (technology) facility to help improve males. Pre pubescent girls and post menopause females can conduct the 40 day regiment and visit the brain therapy facility too.

          However the supreme court of India appears to have mandated that females of child bearing age, pre-pubescent girls and post menopause woman and males need to be able to visit any part of the temple they wish at will, without completing a difficult 40 day sadhana. Naturally India’s females are furious at the Indian supreme court. Many of India’s woman see this as a me too attempt to harass Ayyapa, a celibate young male. Many of India’s females also see this as an attempt to let males be lazy and not complete their 40 day Sadhana. India’s woman are also furious that the global press, global entertainment and global academia are using this incident to demonize eastern philosophy. Which is rich, considering that the east has been feminist for thousands of years before Christ. Indian females who oppose the global “woke” narrative are being demonized as proto Nazis or proto fascists or proto male misogynist supporters of the patriarchy. One eastern female being so demonized is Anjali George. Here she defends eastern woman from the post modernist and caucasian intelligentsia assault:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4923&v=CKZyV3POIuE

          0
          1. “Naturally India’s females are furious at the Indian supreme court.”
            So let me get this. The supreme court said that women may – if they choose – visit the temple. This makes Indian women furious ? Because they fear the supreme court’s decision will create an uncontrollable urge in them to go to the temple against their own wishes ?

            1+
    2. “But the problem is not so much religion but rather violent interpretations of it.”

      But why it is even possible to have any “violent interpretations” when the words are deemed to have directly come from God himself? Where there is fuel there is going to fire if a spark presents itself.

      0
      1. Rationalist, please read between the lines of the comment section here:
        http://www.brownpundits.com/2018/01/17/why-do-nonmulims-mistreat-muslims-so-much/#comment-3809

        Are you 200% sure that the modern printed Korans (there are 12 authentic versions, although each is significantly different from other versions of the Koran) are identical to and includes every part of the holy Koran in heaven?

        Are you 200% sure that Hazrat Aisha, Othman, Muawiyah, Yazid, Marwan and Malik didn’t influence any of the passages in what later came to be called the six Hadiths and Sira?

        Note that the comment section was significantly edited because I got scared.

        Tarek Fatah’s “Fatah Ka Fatwa” was the number 1 TV show in India with hundreds of millions of people watching from around the world. In this TV show the Islamic scripture was discussed. Including Ali’s Koran.

        Only in India (and maybe the US and Canada) can this subject be openly discussed to some degree. This is why the best places in the world for muslims to live are India, USA and Canada.

        Free art and thought will solve this problem.

        0
  2. I could perhaps get your point in the UK where only the right is concerned with limiting immigration from conservative Muslim countries, but what is voting for the Republican party going to do?

    We don’t have the same kind of problem with Islamic BS being transplanted and normalized here. The left might want to, but they don’t have much practical ability to cause harm in that area. Whereas I see more Democrats than Republicans arguing against military intervention in the Middle East, and for shortening the Saudi leash or cutting aid to them. I’d argue that those are the two main ways the US could contribute to reducing the influence of reactionary Islam.

    On the homefront, the best thing we can do is sit back, and let the melting pot work its magic. Assimilation to liberal values works best when you don’t talk about it. You avoid priming reactionary parents, while letting Western degeneracy seep into their children. All you need to do is not let in a critical mass of reactionary immigrants, and not publicly embrace multiculturalism.

    2+
    1. Fraxinicus, I think suggesting voting for Republicans was an emotional response because of deep frustration with post modernists. Personally I want to help classic liberal and democrats fight back against post modernists too.

      We need to stop backing extremist muslims against reasonable muslims.

      “We don’t have the same kind of problem with Islamic BS being transplanted and normalized here. The left might want to, but they don’t have much practical ability to cause harm in that area”

      The Southern Poverty Law Center, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters without borders, the human rights organizations embedded in the UN, US State Department and many other governments are all heavily influenced by American academia and the US establishment. Until recently they were positive organizations influenced by European Enlightenment liberalism. But recently they have been taken over by post modernists. They now have a policy of supporting extremist muslims against reasonable muslims. They oppose freedom of art, speech and thought. They are trying to colonize the minds of “darkies” with inferiority complex and a lack of self confidence.

      They are returning to the dirty and discredited tactics of European imperialist colonialists in the 1800s and 1900s. This is briefly touched upon here:
      http://www.brownpundits.com/2018/02/25/nuanced-understanding-of-british-colonialism/

      The US establishment needs to stop doing this.

      “Whereas I see more Democrats than Republicans arguing against military intervention in the Middle East”
      What does this mean? Do you believe in letting the Saudis control the middle east? Why? I think the entire world should help the Iraqis, Libyans, Egyptians, Afghans, Tunisians, Algerians, Moroccans, Sudanese, Jordanians, Gazans, Lebanese, Turks, Syrians, West Bank people, people of Chad resist Gulf backed Islamist Jihadis. Mostly by surging long term capacity (in civilian institutions, security forces, civil society and the private sector). There is opposition to my ideas from both Republicans and Democrats. Many Republicans, Democrats and Israelis want to give the middle east to Saudi Arabia.

      ” I’d argue that those are the two main ways the US could contribute to reducing the influence of reactionary Islam.”
      The main ways the US can help would be:
      —support moderate muslims against extremist muslims (at the very least stop backing extremist muslims against moderate muslims)
      —support freedom of art, speech and thought all over the world
      —be unapologetic about believing the idea that people are potentially powerful, wise, sovereign
      —improve global collaboration to establish the global commons (investments that have large global externalities or benefits that accrue to people other than the ones paying for the investment)

      “and for shortening the Saudi leash or cutting aid to them”
      On this question both parties are afraid to take on the Saudis. If anything Democrats are generally more afraid and slightly worse. They both collaborate with Saudi Arabia to demonize moderate muslims and call moderate muslims “Islamaphobes.”

      “On the homefront, the best thing we can do is sit back, and let the melting pot work its magic. Assimilation to liberal values works best when you don’t talk about it. You avoid priming reactionary parents, while letting Western degeneracy seep into their children. All you need to do is not let in a critical mass of reactionary immigrants, and not publicly embrace multiculturalism.”

      Mostly agree. But even America needs to do a much better job protecting American atheist muslims, ex muslims and muslim reformers from Islamist Jihadis. Even in America many feel very unsafe. The US should provide police protection to any American muslim who requests it.

      Partly, however, the US is tied down by her alliances with other muslim countries. If the Iraqi, Libyan, Algerian, Afghan, Turkish, Indonesian, Malaysian governments make requests . . . it is hard for the US to turn them down. Because of this the US government should not be in the Islamic reform business. Merely support freedom of thought, art and speech.

      2+
  3. Wow! Zach is angry! You are making even me cringe. But I broadly agree with you. Islam needs to be normalized and we do not have several centuries like Christianity had after 30 years war upto 19th century. We only have a few decades.

    1+
    1. I understand the anger. The events of the past few days would make most reasonable people angry. Hopefully, he will think better of some of the more egregious generalizations in the morning.

      0
  4. But these are structural problems in Pakistani society.

    no, these are a structural problem in LOTS of muslim societies. pakistan amplifies it for various reasons. but the root issue of the abuse of blasphemy laws is pretty universal (and it existed in christian societies with jews before blasphemy fell into disuse).

    0
    1. There is a blasphemy trial going on in Spain at the moment but the reason i actually take a right of centre view in the West (I support the Established Church & Constitutional Monarchy & don’t mind Spain’s blasphemy law as it’s a cultural relic) is because the Enlightenment has broken the back of Christian. It now has to do the same to Islam.

      0
      1. The Enlightenment was a historically specific process. It cannot be imposed on Muslim societies. I share your hope that they will become increasingly secular, but force isn’t going to do it.

        0
  5. Zach, can you share your thoughts on:
    http://www.brownpundits.com/2018/11/02/pakistans-hybrid-government-and-the-aasia-bibi-fiasco/#comment-24215
    http://www.brownpundits.com/2018/03/26/pakistani-psychosis/

    These form my response to you in broad strokes.

    To deconstruct your post word by word:
    “Pakistani liberals are a toothless lot because they dare not challenge the best itself, Islam. There is no peaceful Islam, like any other man-made ideology it becomes cancerous when not checked.”

    What do you mean by “Pakistani liberal”? Are there perhaps a few major categories (that overlap with each other)?:
    —minorities of various kinds (Christians, Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists/Jains, Ahmedis, Bahai, Sufis, twelvers, sixers, Balochis, Pashtuns, Sindhis, Atheists)
    —Hindu tilted muslims (many are Sufis, twelvers, sixers although not everyone in these categories are Hindu tilted)
    —European Enlightenment classical liberal muslims (themselves an offshoot of the Chaarvaaka branch of Hinduism . . . so these are Hindu tilted muslims too)
    —moderate muslims or moderate persons of muslim heritage
    —Post modernists

    Of these the above four are good. The post modernist Pakistani muslims are poison since they believe assumptions that are very damaging to most people. Including that:
    —most humans are not potentially powerful
    —most humans are not potentially wise
    —humans are neither sovereign (classical liberalism) or divine (eastern philosophy)
    —negation of the power of intuition/intelligence, mental health, and love
    —that we do not benefit from the success of others . . . a negation of win/win
    —freedom of art, speech and thought is a form of evil exploitation/oppression/hegemony/imperialism/colonialism/punching down and needs to be opposed
    —society should be focused on preventing those with large amounts of physical health, mental health and intelligence reach their full potential (become extremely successful) because this is unequal and unjust

    Again I ask how do you define Pakistani liberal?

    How do you define “Islam”? There is no need to challenge “Islam” or check “Islam” I think. “There is no peaceful Islam” . . . isn’t saying this a way to back extremist muslims against moderate muslims? Why should we let extremist muslims define Islam? We as a species only need to do a few things:
    —stop backing extremist muslims against moderate muslims (nonmuslims particularly have a problem with this)
    —support freedom of art and thought [in the words of Aurobindo “the problem with India is thought phobia” . . . Pakistan was part of India at that time]
    —encourage diologue with extremists and protect those engaging in dialogue from assassination/retaliation
    —let the sweetness of love melt hearts

    Why does Islam have to be an exclusive faith? Why can’t someone authentically be many religions at once. This is how non Abrahamic religions work.

    1+
    1. “Why does Islam have to be an exclusive faith?”

      As you say yourself, because it’s an Abrahamic religion. Some strains of spirituality are more virulent than others. A shame we can’t go back in time, and knock some sense into whichever Canaanite first got the idea of ditching Ba’al and gang for Yahweh.

      0
    2. Judaism and Christianity are also exclusive faiths owing allegiance to a Jealous God. However their ethos is much different today than what it was even a few generations ago. Religious wars of 17th century gave rise to secularism as a way out. Secular fanaticism is another matter.
      Things change.

      0
  6. “there can be no respite in the taming of Islam.”
    “The Tory Party and Republicans instinctively understand this which is why all Hindus, Sikhs & non-Muslims familiar with Islam must vote with the Right”

    I do not have the same perspective as someone from, say, Punjab. From my sheltered view of south India and Potomac, Md, it is unclear what taming Islam means, or what Republican Party today is, or why I should vote with “the right” in taming Islam.

    The right today is not = the Republican party. The republican party today takes cues from one person , and there is no evidence that the Republican party of the last 30 years is the same as that exists today. This transformation of parties has happened several times in the past. The Congress party of 1960s used to be the party of centralization and nationalization.

    The GOP today may equally turn on Indian, Hispanic or Muslim equally as fast as it can turn on Soros or any jewish person who supports left. It can as well turn on globalism and neoliberalism and transnational companies on a dime. All the equivalencies, the right, republican party, and even the Tory party (at this point, I cannot even state what the Tory party stands for, some form of “tea party/Jon Bull/no EU” agglomeration) are all wrong. It is as if you have missed what has happened in the last two years. The idea that we can go back is to delude oneself.

    1+
  7. What is a Pakistani liberal? Is Duterte a liberal? For example:
    http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2018/july/philippine-president-slams-creeping-influence-of-christian-faith
    Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte has once again taken a swing at Christianity, this time in a discussion over family planning.

    “Without naming the Roman Catholic church, which opposes his government’s reproductive health law, Duterte said, “That is why one of my reasons why I do not like (this) creeping influence of faith that sometimes run counter to what government believes to be good for the people, at least in this temporal life.”

    Two weeks ago Duterte cursed God and called God “stupid” for the concept of “original sin” in the Bible’s creation story. He said, “Adam ate it, then malice was born. Who is this stupid God? That son of a b**** is stupid if that’s the case. You created something perfect and then you think of an event that would tempt and destroy the quality of your work. ”

    The President, who calls himself a Catholic, also disagrees with the doctrine of original sin.

    The Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches denounced the president’s June 22nd tirade, saying, “We, the Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches, as firm believers in God and in the Bible as His inspired Word, are immensely offended by President Rodrigo R. Duterte’s remarks that God and the Bible’s teachings on creation are ‘stupid,'”and said “finds it completely inappropriate for our nation’s President to derisively curse at the God of the Christian faith, who is deeply worshipped not only by a majority of Filipinos but also by a vast number of people from all over the world.”

    Philippine Senator Sonny Trillanes IV called Duterte, “one evil man.”

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Duterte’s interpretation of Christian theology is closer to the interpretation of eastern philosophy. But is Duterte going about it the best way?

    Is directly going after the holy Koran, Hadiths, Sura, Mohammed pbuh the best way?

    0
  8. “I am very upset about the Aasia Bibi case and I find the response of Pakistanis of it to be simply bullshit.”

    I am routinely surprised by the “surprise” of Pakistani folks and Kuglemans of the world on what has happened. This goes to illustrate the fact that the elite really lives in some other island. What exactly did you find strange in the response. This is history repeating itself similar to Ilm-u-din’s case , just that during that time the “liberal” Jinnah and Iqbal who are feted in intellectual circles of both INDIA and Pakistan also cast their lot on that side. And now supposed muslim liberals wake up and act all surprised. LOL.

    The easiest thing to do is to put all the blame on former dictator like Zia who is conveniently found as the “right” villain for all ills of Pakistan. The same goes for Mushraff, all the yes man of both Zia and Mushraff today have refashioned themselves as “liberals”. This is the same thing in India with Indira’s emergency. Everyone becomes a rebel once the King is dead. Or at least tries to be one.

    Pakistan was supposed to and is configured this way from day 1. Always has , always will be. Liberals can sing their Kumbaya on supposed “Jinnah Pakistan” bonfire.

    0
    1. “Pakistan was configured this way from day 1”– This is a historically inaccurate statement. Today’s Pakistan is not what Quaid-e-Azam envisioned, as reflected in the August 11 speech. It is true that there were certain problems inherent in creating a nation on the basis of an exclusive identity like religion but there was no reason that Pakistan had to end up the way it has today.

      General Zia has a lot to answer for.

      P.S. For what its worth, I’m not super big on going on and on about “Jinnah’s Pakistan”. It is up to today’s Pakistanis what to make of the country. However, perhaps it is strategically necessary for beleaguered liberals to appeal to the vision of the country’s founder.

      0
      1. That is too simplistic. Perhaps it is unfair to blame one individual for the ills of today’s Pakistan, but Zia’s policies during his dictatorship did have a huge impact on the direction the country has taken over the last four decades.

        0
  9. The Pakistani liberals dont really have many options. They dont own huge transnational businesses and employ millions of people. They dont have international networks where they are a prominent and integral part. They dont produce visual and entertainment media in a massive way to control the aspirational impulses of society. They simply dont have the resources or tools to influence the politicians.

    Its not really clear what the way forward for them is. Questioning the fundamentals of Islam will not really get them anywhere, only expose them to more violence and discrediting. Honestly, their best hope is to wait it out and encourage industrialization.

    0
    1. Vikram, Pakistan had more freedom under British, Sikh, Afghan and Persian (Nadir Shah), rule than they do now. Pakistani liberals need to fight for their country. And specifically fight for freedom of art and thought. The rest of the world needs to help Pakistanis fight for freedom of art and thought.

      We all need to help Pakistanis free themselves from Islamist Jihadis and Arab colonialism.

      We have extensive polling since the 1980s that shows that support for extremism increases as Pakistanis get more educated and more affluent. Might industrialization without freedom make things worse? Economic development is positive for other reasons. But development might be neutral or negative with respect to Islamism.

      1+
      1. You are quite right, industrialization might not work. But it would create one more group of powerful actors, who might act as a balance against some of the more oppressive tendencies.

        0
        1. It would increase the real tax revenue of the state, and funding for the security forces.

          Globalization will increase the stake that international business has in Pakistani success.

          The greatest danger is Pakistani weakness or dissolution. Economic prosperity helps resist Pakistani weakness and Pakistani dissolution.

          Any other possible benefits?

          Note that the Pakistani Army and Gulf are spending large sums of money every year backing the Taliban and other Al Qaeda linked networks. In the short run Pakistani economic success results in increased capacity of extreme Islamist Jihadis, including Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

          This year perhaps 12,000 ANSF will die in combat in Afghanistan [The actual number could be considerably higher since the Afghan government is classifying ANSF casualties.]. Mostly as part of a Pakistani and Gulf aggression against Afghanistan.

          The Pakistani Army is simultaneously supporting multiple military campaigns all over the world as we speak. Campaigns that have killed hundreds of thousands of muslims.

          Many thousands of Pakistanis have fought the Iraqi Army since 2003. One of the biggest needs the Iraqi Army has had since 2004 is Punjabi and Urdu translators. Because much of the communications of the Iraqi resistance/Al Qaeda/Daesh has been in Punjabi or Urdu.

          The Pakistani Army played a large role in Daesh’s wars against Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Libya, Algeria, Egypt, Gaza, West Bank, Israel, Morocco, Tunisia, Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Thailand, Philippines and many other countries. Some say that part of the reason is to export the Jihadis from Pakistan to the rest of the world so Jihadis don’t kill more Pakistanis.

          0
  10. “One could accuse me of hypocrisy because I’m a Bahai. However it so happens that my religious body isn’t sanction death sentences on innocent women. If it did I would be equally scathing.”
    True.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    “Unless Muslims stand up, attack Islam and have the freedom to call Mohammad a pedophile (whether he was one or both) in central square Mecca without any fears of retribution from either State or individuals, there can be no respite in the taming of Islam.”

    No one has to attack Islam. I don’t want to. And for reals. Not virtue signaling. However everyone has to stand up for the freedom of muslims to say and think whatever they want about Mohammad pbuh, the holy Koran, Hadiths, Sira, Ibh Tammiyah, Islamic theology etc. That is it. We don’t have to do anything else. The rest will happen automatically. The vast majority of muslims have been denied freedom of art and thought for 14 centuries. This needs to stop. Non muslims need to stop backing extremist muslims against moderate muslims. However, why does Islam need to be tamed?
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    “The Tory Party and Republicans instinctively understand this which is why all Hindus, Sikhs & non-Muslims familiar with Islam must vote with the Right.”

    I am confused. We don’t have to join any side since no side is completely on our side. Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with supporting Tories or Republicans in “THIS” election cycle. But be open to voting for the other side in the next election cycle. It is best to be a swing voter in every election. That maximizes influence over the political process. We should continue to try to change the deep intuition and philosophies of people across the political spectrum.

    In any case I don’t think all Tories and Republicans instinctively and deeply understand Islam, Islamism or are committed to helping moderate muslims against extremist muslims. In many ways it is quite the opposite. Many Tories and Republicans also back extremist muslims against moderate muslims . . . much the way most of the world’s 6 billion nonmuslims do. Many Tories and Republicans do not understand the value of freedom of art and thought.

    Have all Tories and Republicans have expressed sadness that extremist muslims have killed over 100 moderate muslims over the 14 century islamic civil war? Have all Tories and Republicans expressed sadness that Daesh and Al Qaeda linked Islamists have killed over a million muslims? Many have, but by no means all. Sure they are far, far, far better than the post modernist and anti muslim bigot Jeremy Bernard Corbyn. But that is a very low bar. Many Labor members are also on the right side on this issue.

    To be honest I think the Liberal Democrats have a better record than either of the big two parties on this issue. It is no accident that the fabulous Maajid Nawaz joined the Lib Dems. Maajid for PM now! Maajid for PM now! Does anyone at Brown Pundits not support Maajid for PM?

    English nonmuslims have a horrible record of backing extremist muslims against reasonable muslims:
    http://www.brownpundits.com/2018/02/26/why-do-english-nonmuslims-treat-english-muslims-so-badly/
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    “I am very upset about the Aasia Bibi case and I find the response of Pakistanis of it to be simply bullshit. Shame on them and shame on Pakistan and shame on me.”
    There is no edge to ever being upset. Why be upset? Shouldn’t we always be in bliss and love. The deep stillness at the center of the storm? 🙂

    1+
  11. “… shame on me.”

    No,in saying this, you infact took a risk. I see this as a place to consider human nature. Of all religions that came to be, I think only jainism stands against violence. We can consider the evolutionary roots for violence. Violent groups with strong in group mentality and strongly opposed to out groups might have had an advantage. In monotheism, this element is the primary factor . So hence we see xtianity,islam dominating as they have become so. so, if we just count the probability of one jainism out of all that humans came up with . It does point to something about us. Like children need to kept away from sharp objects, we too need to be kept safe from dangerous ideas that hijack our deeper tribal mindset. Christianity was opened from within, Islam too will open when muslims see the cost of them killing each other is very high. A costly fight between muslims over islamic theology is the only naturally motivating factor I see as a preferred solution. If fight is between muslims and non muslims. Then it only acts as a reinforcement to tribalism. Let there bloom 10,000 sects of Islam and let them see the futility of killing each other first, then they might listen to outsiders. We are in Islam looking at alternative history of monotheism being played out for what could have been for jews/christians but for all the mitigating factors that changed them otherwise.

    You be careful hereon.

    0
    1. Bharat, what matters is nonviolence or Ahimsa in feeling, intuition and thought. Eastern philosophy is based on it. Even a soldier can practice Ahimsa and fight out of love.

      What is your plan to end the 14 century Islamic civil war? Waiting it out doesn’t seem like the best strategy. Mine is promoting freedom of art and thought and encouraging dialogue.

      0
      1. The problem is of the west being the guarantees of peace in that region. Let them kill/maim themselves asserting their power over each other and trying to see which Islam is the correct one and who should lead the ummah. Then, they might end up with Peace of Westphalia. Without the first step of need for tolerance of muslim deviant sects first, asking them to be tolerant of others is nonsensical. And fighting with non muslims will only reinforce their internal tribalism. Whether it be christianity or Hinduism, the answer for tolerance was found in different sects /ethnic groups /castes needing/having their own interests to safeguard. Without this being agreed to first, the need for law/order doesnt work. Law exists because there is a need for it between competing groups. “Indian secularism” is not based on some deep principles, inspite of high mindedness of Ambedkar and others, “constitution” is an empty word. I didnt read it till now, I am sure 90% of all who arent into law didnt either. Things are allowed to be only so long as there is a need for it to exist because there is some utility to it. Balance of powers is the practical path to peace because it is based on leverage that each party holds on each other the capacity to make their lives miserable. Let the shias and other sects in islam have own weapons and let them unleash on each other first, then they will value the right not to be miserable because of their or others unique interpretation of religion. Then they will get used to being tolerant of deviants, then to those horrible horrible infidels & finally perhaps to anti theists who cannot stop calling mo all kinds of names. I already said this before but I do think peace of westphalia was one of the most defining moments of western history and as a consequence to global history as well. It has not played out among muslims. Even majid nawaz advocates something akin to death by 1000 cuts(sects) strategy. This is the only way. All else is built on the idea that the powerful will be kind and just for the sake of it without knowing(potential or real suffering) why it must mean so much to them.

        Until you dont have the power to make others lives miserable, you dont have the power to get others to treat you fairly either. This is not to say that people dont reason or change for compassion alone, they(some) do that as well. The question is what do you do if they dont?. Why do we have police or army?. The same here. If peace doesnt work, sticks and stones are the only way. But it should not reinforce tribalism. That is the tricky part. We can come in at the end of them fighting each other and help negotiate peace between each other. Right now the west is in alliance with sunnis vs iran. That is not good. If sunnis win outright, then its a bigger problem, if you fight sunnis then they will align with iran and thats a problem too. It would mean their tolerance would now be built on collective greater hatred of infidels. So…

        1+
  12. following nassim taleb , intolerant minority is the key issue. Only few are zealots, if they are supported or are sympathized by the community as a whole, then its a big trouble. If you can get the rest of the community to back out from sympathizing or supporting them for their own interests, then that essentially is the answer we are looking for. This is true in all cases including pomo fanatics and leftist jerks.

    0
  13. I wasn’t aware and could not anticipate many of these things when I was having a chat with general Zia. And how could I, Zack at that time even wasn’t yet in the balls.

    2+
  14. I suggest everyone be careful. People might read this. It is prudent to be worried about this. These days some Hindu fanatics are killing atheists in India too.

    1+
    1. +1008 Jagguji lion of Turin. Jagguji, why have you left English infidels for Rashtrapati Bhavan? England needs you more. Jagguji for English PM now!

      Sai Baba of Shirdi use to say:
      “Sabka Malik Ek” Everyone’s king is One [Who is this king? Read further]
      “Allah Malik hey” [Allah is king]
      But perhaps this can be edited as:
      “Brahma Rishi Brahma Jnaani Maharishi Rajarishi Maha Yogi Sayyid Jagguji Sayyeb Malik hey”

      Jagguji how would you reform Islam?

      0
  15. Pakistan ka matlab kya………..

    Jagvir Jagnesh,
    Janitor in Rashtrapati Bhavan

    1+

    It would be helpful to all readers if an English translation is posted when comments are posted in Indian languages.

    0
    1. Pakistan ka matlab kya…….
      = what is the meaning of Pakistan?

      For all my goray (white) followerz it is the reference to the old pakistani alliterative slogan “pakistan ka matlab kya, la illaha il allah” = “what is the meaning of pakistan, there’s no god but allah”. It denotes the raison d’etre of Pakistan as an Islamic state, formed to protect the vision and mission and future of Islam in the subcontinent and the world.

      I used to be Central Asian Muslim. I have now seen the true light of Buddhism, the old religion of my ancestors, and now work in India – the spiritual home of Buddhism.

      Buddham Sharanam Gatchami.
      Dhammam Sharanam Gatchami.

      #BodhInTheHood
      #DhammaFTW

      2+
        1. I am learning bro vijay. Majjhima Nikaya teaches us to be humble 🙂

          AnAn arya, in Bodh Dhamma arya is the term used for the spiritually noble or elevated souls not genes. A spiritual warrior not a man on horseback. So i welcome the term arya as I am now committed to Dhamma.

          4 noble truths of Buddhism = chattari arya sacchani

          I would happily contribute in my little way to brownpundits.

          Thank you for kind words bro Milan. Milan in urdu or hindi means coming together. I love srpski peoples. We are all one. I welcome you to read about the great teacher buddha.

          0
          1. Let us collaborate on Sakyamuni Gautama Buddha then. In his own words:
            “Esa Dhammo Sanatano”
            This is Sanathana Dharma. And the Buddha was right.

            “AnAn arya, in Bodh Dhamma arya is the term used for the spiritually noble or elevated souls not genes. A spiritual warrior not a man on horseback. So i welcome the term arya as I am now committed to Dhamma.”
            Wisest among us indeed!

            Which heaven shall we meet in holy brother?:
            https://www.hinduwebsite.com/buddhism/buddhistheavens.asp

            When I was a small child I wrote up notes from Buddhist books about all these various heavens and Samadhis and the body physical symptoms correlated with them. I wanted to create a common mapping of terms to correlate all the world’s traditions and religions together [What level of Samadhi in Patanjali’s system correlated with what level of heaven in Theravada Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism, Jainism, Zorastrianism, Toaism etc.]. And now anyone can look this up on the internet. Amazing!

            #Stan in the Hood

            0
  16. Jagguji the wise, you are the crown jewel of the Brown PAndits. The smartest among us. The greatest among us. The wisest among us.

    Can you contribute formally to Brown Pundits or collaborate with me? Your wisdom would be much appreciated.

    Why choose one faith? Why not have 1 lakh faiths? [100,000 religions] Be each religion completely and authentically.
    Be:
    —Abrahamic
    —Abrahamic Jew [I would list each Jewish branches separately but my hands hurt from too much typing]
    —Abrahamic Christian [I would list each Christian branches separately but my hands hurt from too much typing]
    —Abrahamic Sunni
    —Abrahamic Sunni Sufi [I would list each Sufi branches separately but my hands hurt from too much typing]
    —Abrahamic Sunni Salafi
    —Abrahamic Sunni Salafi Hanbali
    —Abrahamic Sunni Salafi Hanbali Wahhabi
    —Abrahamic Sunni Salafi Hanafi
    —Abrahamic Sunni Salafi Maliki
    —Abrahamic Sunni Salafi Shafi’i
    —Abrahamic Sunni Hanafi
    —Abrahamic Sunni Hanafi Deobandi
    —Abrahamic Sunni Hanafi Barelvi
    —Abrahamic Sunni Maliki
    —Abrahamic Sunni Shafi’i
    —Abrahamic Sunni Ẓāhirī
    —Abrahamic Sunni liberal
    —Abrahamic Sunni atheist
    —Abrahamic Shia twelver
    —Abrahamic Shia sixer
    —Abrahamic Shia fiver
    —Abrahamic Druze (technically now affiliated with sixers . . . but I believe they may have preceded Islam)
    —Abrahamic Shia Irfan Sufi
    —Abrahamic Shia liberal
    —Abrahamic Shia atheist
    —Adamic Yazidi [shares commonality with Arya]
    —Arya Zorastrian
    —Arya Hindu Bon
    —Arya Hindu Buddhist
    —Arya Hindu Buddhist Teravada [Teravada is also called Hinayana]
    —Arya Hindu Buddhist Mahayana [Tibetan, Chinese, Japanese Buddhist]
    —Arya Hindu Buddhist Mahayana Vajapani [Tibetan Buddhist]
    —Arya Hindu Buddhist Mahayana Zen [Japanese Buddhist]
    —Arya Hindu Chaarvaaka [atheist]
    —Arya Hindu Ajivika [atheist + reincarnation + no free will] [Sam Harris has many similarities with them]
    —Arya Hindu Samkhya
    —Arya Hindu Samkhya Yoga [applied Samkhya within the superset of Samkhya]
    —Arya Hindu Jain
    —Arya Hindu Jain Digambara [Many Digambara traditions in other Hindu orders]
    —Arya Hindu Jain Svetambara
    —Arya Hindu Jain Svetambara Sthanakavasi
    —Arya Hindu Jain Svetambara Murtipujaka
    —Arya Hindu Jain Svetambara Terapanth
    —Arya Hindu Nyaaya
    —Arya Hindu Nyaaya Vaisheshika [Vaisheshika might not be completely a subset within the superset of Nyaaya]
    —Arya Puurva Mimaamsa
    —Arya Puurva Mimaamsa Uttara Mimaamsa [technically this too has more than 100 major schools]
    I am tiring of typing all the many religions.
    —Arya Hindu Sikh
    —Arya Hindu Sufi [closely related to the six Shaivite Nath Siddha lineages, the Maha Siddhas of Mahayana Buddhism and Sikhism; note this applies to some but not all Sufi schools]
    —Taoism [which I consider to be very similar to Arya and Arya Hinduism; Hindus believe that Loa Tsu was another name for Bhoganather . . . one of the greatest saints of Hinduism]
    —Atheist
    —Agnostic
    —Baha’i [Should this be Abrahamic Baha’i [Pan Humanist]? Since this is such a young religion . . . I am not sure exactly how to classify it.]

    We don’t have to choose religions. We can authentically be “ALL Religions”. If anyone has a problem with that, that is “THEIR” problem, not our problem.

    Thank you,
    #Stan is the Hood

    PS.

    “For all my goray (white) followerz”
    Must I remind you that you have the best genes in the universe? You are Arya. You are white. Or as I like to call it white plus, or white with benefits.

    0
    1. Jaggu is going back to his ancient Serbian roots. Respect. I invite him to become a founding member of SASB (South Asian Serbian Brotherhood).

      1+
  17. Zack, can you add this video to your post:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xheyJF9zJFc
    Moderate muslims are afraid of getting killed if they publicly critique extremists. Hindus and all nonmuslims need to stand by moderate muslims and protect them from extremist muslims. So far Hindus (including Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs) and all nonmuslims have been during a terrible job at it.

    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.