Pickled Politics






Family

Comrades

In-laws







Site Meter

Let’s talk about sex baby…


by Sunny on 5th April, 2006 at 5:12 pm    

False alarm - there’s no talk of sex here, sorry. But we are talking about Muslims and other ‘communities’:

Non-Muslims writing about Muslims, or whites writing about race are usually forced into two camps: 1) the secular left who argue in their defence from an anti-opressive standpoint; 2) the rightwing ideologues who see Islamic ideology/political correctness as the problem.

This puts Muslims in a worse situation because hitherto unknown organisations start speaking on their behalf and get prominence as representatives. They stop becoming individuals; they become a “community”. It also makes them reluctant to publicly speak out against extremist elements lest they get accused of being “sellouts”.

This from my latest Comment is Free article.



  |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Digg this   |   Filed under: Media, Race politics




9 Comments   |  


  1. Lachlan — on 6th April, 2006 at 8:05 am  

    Sunny, I’m sorry but the extract from your article above is nonsense - or at the very least a huge over-simplification. The vast majority of people on the secular left that I have spoken to against such matters are, of course, more than willing to stand up for any minority against oppression. However, they are no friend to the Islamist and were firmly on the side of free speech on the cartoon issue.

    I think you are confusing the hardcore extremist left - who will side with anyone against the “Imperialist forces” and have formed an alliance with extremist Muslims - with the less vocal but vastly more numerous moderate left.

  2. Siddhartha Singh — on 6th April, 2006 at 12:58 pm  

    We’re told by the “progressive” Left time and time again that the hardcore Left, represented by the Trotskyists and the SWP types, have thrown the Left’s disorientation into sharp relief. The reason given is almost always that the extreme Left have become, we are told, apologists for Islamists.

    Has anyone paid any attention to the Liberal Left, who now look indistinguishable from elements from the Far Right? You just have to see how the BNP have re-purposed the Freedom of Expression (read “Muslims Out”) as the perfect vehicle for their anti-Islamic agenda to see that. More telling is the Liberal (muscular?) Left’s inability to address that.

    As El Cid put it so brilliantly here once:
    Pussies to the lef of me, wankers to the right
    here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

  3. soru — on 6th April, 2006 at 1:44 pm  

    ‘vast majority of people on the secular left ‘

    The problem is the traditional community leaders of the left are out of touch. They speak a different language from ordinary leftist, and spend their time engaged in arcane theological disputes.

    That leaves the field free to various frauds and charlatans who claim to speak for the left, but have never so much as organised a strike or given a sociology lecture.

  4. Lachlan — on 6th April, 2006 at 1:44 pm  

    I think your political, and probably moral, compass needs remagnetising if you cannot separate the liberal left from the far right when those parties disagree over pretty much everything. The hardcore left, on the other hand, agree firmly with the far right on most topics, from Iraq to America. This has always been so.

    The BNP’s self-serving adoption of a “Freedom of Speech” agenda is as transparent as it will be short-lived. They do not believe in freedom of speech in any meaningful way. Their views on every topic are anathema to any true liberal.

    Your post above seems to me to betray, Siddartha, an unwillingness to admit that you are not a liberal.

    But maybe I’m wrong.

  5. Lachlan — on 6th April, 2006 at 1:49 pm  

    I should clarify that the BNP and other fascists will always CLAIM to be in favour of free speech as they are against censorship of their own views. However, they do not believe in extending this courtesy or right to those whom they despise, and it doesn’t take a psychic to predict that if they ever gained any power (which they won’t), then freedom of speech will be one of the first things to go.

    Ditto the hard left and Islamists, all of whom are opposed by liberals, whether on the liberal left or otherwise.

  6. Sunny — on 6th April, 2006 at 2:00 pm  

    I think you’re misunderstanding my article Lachlan. I’ve not doubted that much of the liberal left will stand up for opression.

    The points have to be taken in context:
    Above, I was talking about about non-Muslims writing in the media about Muslims - you only get the Madeleine Bunting types and the Mark Steyn types mostly. Anyone who can see through the community politics bullshit (Zia Sardar for example) don’t really get much of an opportunity. We have people who don’t know much about Muslims, or having many Muslim friends, writing about the issue from an outsider’s perspective.

  7. Siddhartha Singh — on 6th April, 2006 at 2:26 pm  

    I think your political, and probably moral, compass needs remagnetising if you cannot separate the liberal left from the far right when those parties disagree over pretty much everything.

    You’re right that there is no convergence between the Far Right and the Liberal Left ideologies, and I should hope so. But we’re not talking about ideology here but more about a utilitarian adoption of, say, the Danish cartoons as a banner for FoE and remain silent about the offence caused to Muslims (in the UK and elsewhere) in the process. And its this silence that is more offensive than speech.

    And you’re right Lachlan. I AM unwilling to call myself a “Liberal” if it means having standing on the same side of the fence as the BNP.

  8. Lachlan — on 6th April, 2006 at 7:28 pm  

    Sunny, in the context of the MSM you are right, however my point was as a blogger you are clearly aware of many other non-Muslims writing about Muslims who DON’T fall into either camp. Having now read the full article, I understand your point better.

    Siddartha, Muslims were also offended by The Satanic Verses ( a much better cause to raise the banner over, I hope you would agree). But the principle is the same, and offence is irrelevant to that principle. As Stephen Fry once said: “You’re offended? So f*cking what?”. Same goes for offended Christians with JSTO, offended Sikhs with Behzti, and offended secularists with the recent hijacking of public debate by a bunch of mentalists.

    As for this, “I AM unwilling to call myself a “Liberal” if it means having standing on the same side of the fence as the BNP. “, I will be charitable and assume that you haven’t thought it through.

  9. Sid D H Arthur — on 6th April, 2006 at 8:56 pm  

    So f*cking what?

    So fuck off.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2006. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.