Because the Left and the Muslims form a Jew hating symbiosis……
In the era of Obama and the rise of the Left, the Jews will feel the pinch first as the country slides into the abyss.
BDS SPREADS ANTI-SEMITISM ACROSS U.S. CAMPUSES
Where BDS goes, Jew hatred follows.
Reprinted from InvestigativeProject.org.
Anti-Semitic incidents seem to spring up each week on college campuses throughout the United States. According to a study, “The strongest predictor of anti-Jewish hostility on campus” is the presence of a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel. The greater the BDS activity, especially involving faculty members, the more likely anti-Semitic episodes become, said the study issued last month by the AMCHA Initiative, a non-profit organization dedicated to investigating, documenting, and combating anti-Semitism on U.S. campuses.
One recent example occurred on April 15, when the City University of New York Doctoral Students’ Council passed a resolution calling for an academic boycott of Israel, 42-19. Weeks earlier, a CUNY professor and BDS advocate claimed that the killing of Palestinians in Gaza “reflects Jewish values.” On CUNY campuses, the New York Observer reports, Jewish students were harassed, with “Jews out of CUNY” uttered in at least one instance, and a professor who wears a yarmulke was called a “Zionist pig.”
On April 21, two-thirds of a union representing about 2,000 graduate students at New York University voted to approve a motion to support a BDS resolution against Israel. The motion also urges the union and its affiliate, the United Auto Workers, to divest from Israeli companies. The resolution asks NYU to close its program at Tel Aviv University, claiming the program violates NYU’s non-discrimination policy.
Dumb complied from even dumber….
If this is representative of the nation as a whole, we’re doomed.
h/t: Frank Gaffney (CSP)
I am so sorry I am only finding out about this now, a day late. I would have flown across the country to attend. Imagine the acrobatics Ghassan Hage had to perform in order to make this even remotely plausible, even with the audience so eager to be fooled that he undoubtedly had. On the other hand, if the dim-bulb “Islamophobia”-fearmonger Haroon Moghul (that’s right, “Dwayne”) could sell Time Magazine on the idea that “Islamophobia” is responsible for America’s crumbling infrastructure, academic audiences these days may be even stupider than I thought.
“Is ISLAMOPHOBIA accelerating global warming?,” MIT Global Studies and Languages, May 9, 2016 (thanks to Faisal Saeed AlMutar):
The Ecology and Justice Forum In Global Studies And Languages Presents:
Ghassan Hage is Future Generation Professor in the School of Philosophy, Anthropology and Social Inquiry, University of Melbourne
Introduced By Bettina Stoetzer, Global Studies And Languages
Mon. May 9
This talk examines the relation between Islamophobia as the dominant form of racism today and the ecological crisis. It looks at the three common ways in which the two phenomena are seen to be linked: as an entanglement of two crises, metaphorically related with one being a source of imagery for the other and both originating in colonial forms of capitalist accumulation. The talk proposes a fourth way of linking the two: an argument that they are both emanating from a similar mode of being, or enmeshment, in the world, what is referred to as ‘generalised domestication.’
“Never again” means also to “never forget”……
The reason for the continued commemoration of the Holocaust, is not because Jews themselves are special, but for the uniqueness of the German National Socialists’ (and their supporters in areas under their occupation) genocide of the Jewish people. Their goal was for the systematic destruction of the Jewish people wherever they were, and in how they went about it.
Chester University’s Darta Kaleja spoke against commemorating Holocaust memorial day on the grounds that it ignores other global atrocities and genocides.
Student leaders argued against an amendment to commemorate the Holocaust on campuses during Britain’s National Union of Students (NUS) Conference on Wednesday, according to reports by the Telegraph.
Chester University’s Darta Kaleja spoke against commemorating Holocaust memorial day on thegrounds that it ignores other global atrocities and genocides.
“Before I start I want to make it clear I am not against commemorating the Holocaust,” Kelja said. “I am against the NUS and the government forgetting and ignoring the mass genocides, and prioritizing some lives over others.”
“In my five years of UK education throughout GCSEs and A Levels, not once were the genocides of Tibet, Rwanda, or Zanzibar taught to me and my peers,” Kelja added. “So please, please vote against this motion, against the one day dedicated purely to atrocities of just one mass genocide, as it suggests that some lives are more important than others. Instead campaign for a day to commemorate all of them.”
Kaleja’s speech was received by the audience with a strong round of applause.
Sam Gold of Leeds University spoke in favor of the amendment, asking for delegates to support the motion to keep the memory of the Holocaust alive in the NUS.
“The living memory of the Holocaust is dying,” said Gold.
You would think an anti-Semite would be proud of his or her work…..
More Jew hatred from Crapademia…….
Scholar Who Gave Anti-Israel Lecture Threatens to Sue Anyone Who Publishes Audio of Talk
A heated controversy has erupted in the wake of a lecture on “Inhumanist Biopolitics: How Palestine Matters” delivered at Vassar College on February 3 by Jasbir K. Puar, Associate Professor of Women’s and Gender Studies at Rutgers University. While Puar’s critics charge that her lecture provided especially offensive examples of contemporary anti-Semitism in the form of age-old anti-Semitic tropes updated and applied to Israel, her supporters insist that her work is based on solid scholarship and that the criticism of her talk at Vassar should be seen as a threat to academic freedom and the right to free speech. But the claim that Puar is merely exercising her academic freedom and right to free speech in her lectures does not seem to imply that everyone should have the right to hear what she has to say: Puar recently cancelled a scheduled lecture on “the biopolitics of debility in Gaza” at Fordham University when the university administration insisted on recording her talk and making it publicly available; and she has also threatened legal action against anyone who would make an existing audio recording of her Vassar lecture public.
The circumstances leading to Puar’s cancellation of her talk at Fordham were reported by the New York Daily News, which had previously published a scathing editorial on her lecture at Vassar. According to the paper’s report, “Fordham President Rev. Joseph McShane has made clear that, as an institution, the school condemns much of Puar’s outlook on Israel,” but that the university was nevertheless prepared to host Puar for a lecture “as a matter of free expression.” However, in the interest of “academic transparency” and in order to shield Puar from the alleged “mischaracterizations” that followed her talk at Vassar, McShane reportedly “directed aides to inform Puar she could speak only if she was recorded and the recording was made public.” Professor Puar preferred to cancel her talk at Fordham.
Puar’s reluctance to be recorded was also highlighted in one of the first reports about her lecture at Vassar, when William A. Jacobson of Legal Insurrection noted that the speaker introducing Puar at Vassar requested that audience members “refrain from recording” Puar’s talk, even though it was explicitly acknowledged that such a recording “is not against the law.” Despite this, an alumni group called Fairness to Israel attended Puar’s talk and prepared a transcript on the basis of a recording that was obtained by the group.
In the context of the ensuing controversy about Puar’s talk at Vassar, it is important to note that her supporters claim that “anyone who heard her Vassar lecture…can attest [that] her words are carefully chosen.” If so, it would obviously be in Puar’s interest to refute her critics with the help of the existing recording of her Vassar talk. This is especially true given that Puar faces serious allegations. In the words of Mark G. Yudof and Ken Waltzer, whoseWall Street Journal op-ed, “Majoring in Anti-Semitism at Vassar,” seemed to enrage Puar’s supporters in particular:
Ms. Puar passed on vicious lies that Israel had “mined for organs for scientific research” from dead Palestinians—updating the medieval blood libel against Jews—and accused Israelis of attempting to give Palestinians the “bare minimum for survival” as part of a medical “experiment.”…Ms. Puar’s calumnies reached a new low. She spoke of Jews deliberately starving Palestinians, “stunting” and “maiming” a population. The false accusation that a people, some of whose members were experimented on at Auschwitz, are today experimenting on others is a disgrace.
Another brilliant essay from Tzofar, at the Tundra Tabloids
Bigotry Comes in all Colors—Especially in Academia
“Anti-Zionist” rhetoric in educational institutions is escalating at an alarming pace. When confronted, some anti-Israel, pro-BDS activists take pains to say they are anti-Israel but not anti-Semitic. In reality many have dropped any pretense of civility in their online postings and correspondence. The response by college administrators has been to blather and do nothing, especially when the proponents are from “acceptable” minorities.
Caroline Glick’s column this week called for Israeli and Jewish leadership to take a stand against BDS—without mincing words and apologizing. She cited two cases currently spiking media attention. One involves a couple who pulled their kids out of a Jewish day school because of a self-hating, BDS-slanted classroom environment. In a fit of punitive retribution, the school sued for the entire balance of the upcoming year’s tuition.
Glick doesn’t point this out, but this story was reported by philosophy lecturer Andrew Pessin. Pessin is now on extended sabbatical from Connecticut College. A popular smear campaign by a Muslim student resulted in an award for the student from the director of “institutional equity and inclusion”, while Pessin got months of death threats. The college administration has shown a total lack of spine in this case. We’ll look at why later.
In the second case, über-liberal Oberlin College, linked to the proud history the Underground Railway which smuggled slaves to freedom, is now another certifiably anti-Semitic hotbed. Historically, a religious sense of justice and morality were the driving forces in Oberlin; now anti-Semitic intolerance and insult are the stock and trade of students and faculty. Delegitimizing the kosher co-op, and a hostile BDS protest on Rosh HaShanah, are just two slaps Jews were served there.
Tower Magazine reported another Oberlin BDS issue, the failure to fire or discipline Joy Kanega, a lecturer who posts anti-Semitic propaganda on her Facebook page. According to Kanega, Jews and Zionists were responsible for 9/11, the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and more—while dominating the world by controlling world banking, a lie à la Protocols of the Elders of Zion or Islamist hate preaching.
The Oberlin administration has distanced itself from her remarks while leftist students are demanding she gets tenure. Kanega warned Oberlin that if she is fired, that would be the kind of thing racist institutions do to young black women who are starting their careers. Get it? Intersectionality again. Every member of a “correct” minority is above criticism, even if others are hurt in the process. Pointing out a black woman’s bigotry is as “racist” as pointing out that Muslim men kill women for adultery.
At Ben Shapiro’s lecture on the “diversity” myth, members of the Black Student Union menaced a student who was videoing their protest. A mob of BDS students blocked the lecture hall entrance. Would-be attendees tiptoed in a back door under police escort. Police assessed that Shapiro was in danger of bodily harm from the mob. Shapiro had to be smuggled out of the building—in his own “underground” exit.
Young blacks repeat anti-Semitic BDS memes, just as Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has made a career out bigotry and blame, including frank Jew-hatred. It is easier to blame than to achieve. Just yesterday Farrakhan praised Donald Trump for not taking “Jewish influence” money.
Once upon a time, the Rev. Martin Luther King hoped for a time “when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character”. Rev. King inspired Americans to achieve. In the same hope, Jews marched in the South with the Civil Rights Movement out of a deep conviction that everyone deserved to strive and succeed, without prejudice.
Positive messaging is sorely lacking today.
Today, BDS is a cause adopted not only by Muslims, but by ersatz liberals, including black studies professors such as the Connecticut College equality and diversity director, David Canton. Canton gave an award to the “brown” Muslim student who smeared “white” Andrew Pessin. Then Pessin received death threats from “anti-racists”. Once the thought police stick a color label on someone, all counter arguments become “hate speech”. It is superfluous to point out that all students are ill-served when they spend four years ingesting this kind of tripe. On exit they get smacked with the real world, college loan debt, and not a lot of job prospects.
Academic administrations are so scared of losing their credentials as liberals that they cower and do nothing to push back against the bigoted anti-Semitic wave that is washing across college campuses. The same is true of pro-BDS liberal Jews. They are self-haters who aspire to acceptance by bashing fellow Jews and feeling self-righteous about it. The tidal wave will spare neither the liberal academics nor the Jews, unless they find courage, as King did.
ChanahS: Slamming Jews is not bigotry, and as long as the admin distances itself from staff remarks, everything is cool.
This is exactly what’s happening in Finland with Aalto University downplaying prof.Paavo Kinnunen’s rabid anti-Semitism.
Oberlin Alumni Outraged Over Administration’s ‘Tepid Response’ to Antisemitism at Alma Mater
Anger continued to grow this week after last week’s revelation of an Oberlin professor’s antisemitic Facebook rants and the college’s response to it, particularly among alumni, some of whom returned to the Ohio school Monday and Tuesday to meet with administrators, staff and students and discuss what they consider to be growing antisemitism at the school.
As reported last Wednesday by The Tower, Oberlin Prof. Joy Karega’s Facebook page was discovered to be filled with years’ worth of posts promoting many traditional antisemitic claims: that Jews were behind the 9/11 attacks, that Jews control the world’s banks and own the “news, the media, your oil, and your government.” In response to the revelation, Oberlin President Marvin Krislov issued the following statement:
Oberlin College respects the rights of its faculty, students, staff, and alumni to express their personal views. Acknowledgement of this right does not signal institutional support for, or endorsement of, any specific position. The statements posted on social media by Dr. Joy Karega, assistant professor of rhetoric and composition, are hers alone and do not represent the views of Oberlin College.
Criticism immediately followed.
Renowned Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz told The Tower,
If Karega had expressed comparably bigoted views about Blacks, Muslims or gays, the President of Oberlin would not have posted the boilerplate he posted. He would have condemned those views, even if he defended her right to express them.
Aron Hier, speaking for human rights and antisemitism watchdog the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told The Algemeiner:
There’s no contradiction between embracing the First Amendment and calling upon public officials to condemn those hateful, antisemitic and odious forms of speech protected by that very amendment. Hate speech may be protected speech, but university officials have both the right and the moral obligation to call it out for what it is by vociferously repudiating and condemning it.
More here. H/T: ChanahS
They’re digging in their heels, but they don’t realize that Aussie Dave has already dug his in long before they did.
Following my expose of antisemitic professor Paavo Kinnunen, many of you and others flooded Aalto University’s Facebook page with demands they take action. In addition, fans of Kinnunen left their own comments, standing by their man while claiming he is not antisemitic, just critical of Israel(!) Some even threatened to sue me.
Let them try. I stand behind my post, comprising of Kinnunen’s own posts which are clearly antisemitic. I am sure any court would find in my favor.
And how did Aalto university respond? It seems as though they asked him to unequivocally state his views are entirely his own – as he did on his Facebook page.
They mirrored this distancing from his views, in the comments to my post but also elsewhere.
Other than that, it seems like he may have escaped serious punishment.
That’s all we need, statists honing their skills from islamonazis…….
“When you start looking at what they actually produce, it is so much more,” he says. “Violence is such a small percentage of the propaganda – it is about belonging, it is familiarity, it is happy children, it is paradise-like environments.”
Give me a break, we’ve all seen this before. Would he dare say the same thing about Nazi propaganda expert, Joseph Goebbels?
Media activism at Malmö: Why we should study Isis
Published: 19 Feb 2016 10:45 GMT+01:00
Malmö University’s Michael Krona is on the cutting-edge of research into the world of Isis propaganda. He reveals how genuinely impressive the terrorist organization’s media-wing is, and the surprises he has discovered along the way.
As a senior lecturer, Krona believes the university’s communication programme offers a unique approach that prepares graduates for this fast-paced, evolving field – a field where his finger is firmly on the pulse.
Having previously researched communication during the Arab Spring uprisings, Krona has more recently begun to analyse media activism and what can be achieved with technology – his specialist field within the English-language master’s programmes at Malmö University.
“I was surprised when studying activism as part of the communication field, because basically every contribution was very optimistic and romanticising about the role of technology, with people saying this can save the world,” he remarks.
Disturbed, but that’s what passes for normal at supposed institutions of higher learning.
As you will read below, Puar’s appearance amounted to an anti-Israel propaganda event at which Israel was portrayed in a manner reminiscent of ancient blood libels. A major theme of the talk was that Israel treats Palestinians as part of a type of scientific experiment developed to “stunt” Palestinian bodies.
— “So, was that speech written by some kind of random word generator? Because it makes absolutely no sense. Can you imagine sitting through a semester of her lectures?”— She speaks Collectivist gobbledygook in at least two languages.— Precisely. Queer theory -> Critical theory -> radical, emancipatory forms of Marxian theory and Social theory oriented toward critiquing and changing society as a whole.
NOTE: For me, it’s like listening to someone drone about their cult’s core beliefs, full of incoherencies and fervor while looking at your watch and trying to get them to move from your front door step.
Vassar faculty-sponsored anti-Israel event erupts in controversy
Invited speaker accuses Israel of scientific experiment in “stunting” growth of Palestinian bodies
Once again, Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, NY, is mired in controversy regarding anti-Israel activities on campus involving Vassar faculty.
The controversy surrounds the February 3, 2016, appearance of Rutgers Associate Professor Jasbir Puar at the invitation of several Vassar departments, including Jewish Studies.
At the outset of the appearance, according to the Vassar alumni/parent/friends group Fairness to Israel (FTI), a request was made by the Vassar professor introducing the speaker not to record the event, although it was acknowledged that it was legal to do so:
Before I give my brief remarks, I would like to request that you silence your devices you brought with you so as not to disrupt the conversation with Professor Puar is conducting with us today. I would also like to request on her behalf and on behalf of the rest of the assembly that you refrain from recording this evening’s proceedings, in the spirit of congeniality and mutual respect, though it is not against the law, to record someone vocation professional labor without informing them, it is quite unseemly and violates the modest contract of trust essential to the exchange of ideas.
Requesting non-recording of an open, public event on the pretext that non-recording is “essential to the exchange of ideas” is odd.
When I make public appearances I almost always record them because I am not afraid that what I say will be used against me, but because I don’t want people claiming I said something I didn’t say. I have posted several of my appearances on YouTube precisely to facilitate the “exchange of ideas.”
If exchange of ideas was the goal, why would the Vassar faculty sponsors of the Puar event not want it recorded?
More here. H/T: ChanahS.
So Leftist students are the new (sole) arbitrators for what’s to be deemed as proper in society?
I think not, it’s the rest of us who never went to college, I’d choose the first thousand names in a phone book from a non-muslim populated portion of society where people actually earn a living, to deem what’s best for society.
NOTE: The man is one riveting speaker. He knows how to tell a story.
Cambridge University axes historian David Starkey from its funding video after students branded him ‘sexist and racist’
Historian David Starkey was due to lead a £2bn fundraising drive by Cambridge University in a video featuring alumni but an open letter signed by both student union officials and lecturers called for him to be edited out
- Cambridge University dropped David Starkey from its funding campaign
- Students branded the historian and broadcaster as ‘sexist and racist’
- He was going to lead a £2billion fundraising drive in a three-minute video
- But open letter signed by student union officials and lecturers called for him to be edited out, adding they were ‘deeply offended’ by his inclusion
Cambridge University has dropped historian David Starkey from its funding campaign – because students branded him sexist and racist.
The historian and broadcaster was due to lead a £2bn fundraising drive by the University in a three-minute video featuring alumni including Stephen Hawking and Sir Ian McKellen.
But an open letter signed by both student union officials and lecturers called for him to be edited out, saying they had been ‘deeply offended’ by his inclusion.
These people are totally detached from reality, and want to force you into their fantasy land.
UNREAL: Mass Media Professor Demands “Some Muscle” To Remove Reporter From Mizzou Protest Camp
Katie Pavlich | Nov 10, 2015
Now, protestors on campus and campus faculty are taking the situation to a whole new extreme. When a reporter went into a protest “safe space” camp yesterday to ask some questions about their goals and motives, a Mizzou assistant media professor demanded that he leave. Her name is Melissa Click and according to her bio, she’s currently researching 50 Shades of Gray and the relationship Lady Gaga has with her fans on social media. When the reporter refused, she went around the camp asking for “some muscle” to remove him. Ironically, the reporter is a student reporter for the Mizzou student newspaper.
“You need to get out! You need to get out!” Click is seen yelling. “Hey! Who wants to help me get this reporter out of here?! I need some muscle over here!”
“You need to back up if you’re the media! You need to back up! Respect the students! Back up! You need to go!”
NOTE: This is exactly what Flemming Rose was talking about in his response to my question in Helsinki in October 2015
The fact that professors are actually intimidated by these half brained low lives dressed up as students is a testament to their own mediocrity.
US academia models the Swedish state. After decades of radical leftistism, extremist stupidity is the desired norm, common sense, reason and rational thinking has gone out the window, what’s remains is muddled mush tempered with hypersensitivity. Safe spaces for tyrants.
Students of history will notice an alarming similarity in the video above to the “struggle sessions” of Maoist China, a form of public shaming in which perceived enemies of the Party would be surrounded in a public place by Red Guards, Mao’s most zealous supporters. The Red Guards would hurl abuse at their target until they confessed to their crimes.
Uninformed critics might argue that the Red Guards were a weapon of the Communist state, and not a genuine grassroots movement, but they’d be wrong: the Red Guards started out as a student movement, on Chinese campuses. Afraid yet?
ONLY CONSERVATIVES CAN SAVE THE AMERICAN CAMPUS–BUT SHOULD WE?
What does it take to generate a rabid, Maoist-style mob demanding political purges, on an Ivy League campus, in 2015? An email defending “offensive” Halloween costumes, apparently.
That’s what kicked off the latest nadir in campus zealotry, this time at no less a university than Yale. Typically the fall is a time when Yale students are obsessed with defeating arch-rival Harvard at football, a war on the gridiron that occasionally turn ugly. This year the sport of choice seems to be the public castigation of professors by students, a battle on the quadrangle destined to become just as menacing.
Outrage began at Yale a few days ago, after an email sent by Associate Master Erika Christakis became public knowledge. Christakis complained that universities were no longer safe for “regressive, or even transgressive, experience,” arguing that they had instead become places of “censure and prohibition.”
Since then, both Erika Christakis and her husband Nicholas Christakis, the Master of Silliman College at Yale, have been the targets of a rabid crusade by student witch-hunters to pressure the pair into resignation. This culminated last week in shocking footage of students surrounding Nicholas Christakis, screaming expletives at him and calling for his resignation.
Before anyone launches into a “they’re just trying to address the mental state of a student”, take a step back and ponder this. They actually agree with the idea that it’s a damaging document.
Hid Cam: Officials at Cornell & Yale Shredding/Ripping the Constitution as it “Triggers” Students
Remember folks, it’s all forms of jihad to instill the sharia and Islamic norms in the non-Muslim West.
OCTOBER 2015 Yale follies (cont’d)
The ivy league school recently announced a new Center for the Study of Islamic Law and Civilization at Yale Law School.
Burke was right!
Last month, we introduced our readers to the inadvertently comic spectacle of Stephen Davis, hapless Master of Pierson College at Yale University. Professor Davis, to the delight of connoisseurs of cant, donned the mantle of ostentatious, politically correct self-congratulation by announcing to the world that he was too egalitarian to bear the title “Master” or even, reading between the lines, “man” (“gender equity,” you know).
Professor Davis doubtless approves of Pope Francis’s attacks on capitalism and fossil fuels (though we are uncertain where he stands on the great moral issue of air-conditioning: it can get hot in New Haven). We suspect that he is oozing sympathy, too, for the recent announcement that Yale, the beneficiary of a $10 million gift, would be creating a Center for the Study of Islamic Law and Civilization at Yale Law School.
The Center will be named for its donor, the Saudi businessman Abdallah S. Kamel, the same chap whose earlier gift to Yale brought the Tunisian Sheikh Rachid al-Ghannouchi to campus. Some reports described the Sheikh as “controversial.” Ah, yes, “controversial,” an anodyne euphemism that, in the Sheikh’s case, compasses longtime support of radical Islamic terror groups. He has repeatedly called for Muslims to wage “unceasing war against the Americans.” He signed on to a fatwa in 2004 calling for the murder of U.S. troops in Iraq, has publicly endorsed Palestinian terrorism as “wonderful,” and has encouraged the terror group Hamas to “get rid of the Zionist cancer,” i.e. Israel.
More here. H/T: Diana West
Academia is loaded with these far-leftist cranks, so no, it’s not really a shock to us who follow these things.
Think twice America before sending your kids off to university on your hard earned cash, they might come back loathing the land you love.
Nutty professor: Rutgers teacher who said US worse than ISIS has history of bizarre statements
A Rutgers University professor who is under fire for saying that the U.S. is “more brutal” than ISIS has used racial slurs against white men, attacked a leading advocate against female genital mutilation and even led a successful protest last year to stop former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice from speaking to students.
Deepa Kumar, associate professor of journalism and media studies at New Jersey’s main public university, made news recently by tweeting: “Yes ISIS is brutal, but US is more so, 1.3 million killed in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.” But that tweet, sent in March but only brought to prominent attention after it was noticed by the site SoCawlege.com, is not Kumar’s first brush with digital bigotry.
“Okay, I’m sold on using the term ‘douchebag’ to describe rich, white entitled males and their misogynistic, racist behavior!” Kumar wrote in a Facebook endorsement of an online article last fall.
I just couldn’t let this pass.
I came across this earlier today, a four point boiler plate ‘academic’ vaporing (originally in Spanish) on ”islamofauxbia”. It constitutes purified simplistic drivel supporting a radical leftist (Muslim Brotherhood) narrative, but unfortunately, simplistic drivel is what the ruling mediocrity are feeding upon these days.
NOTE: I parsed (Fisked) the paper in order to provide an example on how the left promotes a bowdlerized view of a dangerous ideology, in order to protect a pet project by demonizing those with legitimate concerns. In fact, it’s flat out lies laced with ambiguities and disingenuous blatherings. Feel free to leave your own observations in the comment section.
Islamophobia: Some Commonplaces
çngeles Ram’rez, anthropologist, activist and co-author of
La alteridad imaginada. El p‡nicomoral y la construcci—n de lo musulm‡n en Espa–a y Francia
Originally published in Spanish in Diagonal (https://www.diagonalperiodico.net/tags-autores/angeles-ramirez)Translated by Pamela J. Lalonde
Just as male chauvinism does not only consist of women being killed by their partners and contemporary racism is not solely defined by attacks on minorities, Islamophobia cannot be reduced to violence against mosques or Muslims.
[TT: I wonder if the Spanish leftist anthropologist (and islamo-apologist) would condemn attacks on neo-nazi/fascist headquarters as examples of ”xenophobia”, or just the criminal activity of upset people taking the law into their own hands?]
To invoke an old analogy: only the Nazis implemented the extermination of the Jewish population in Europe as a state policy, but the idea that the Jewish race was a foreign and corrupt one that was exploiting the Germans and deserved to be excluded was widely shared by the German population of the time. The idea determined the action. In the case of Islam, while only a few right-wingers may be out on the streets spearheading the violent opposition to a mosque opening, for example, that action is premised by stereotypes about Islam, assumptions that are shared by most people, regardless of political affiliation: the religion is linked to violence; Muslims are potential fanatics; Islam deprives women of rights. This is Islamophobia, understood as racism against Muslims.
[TT: A classic example of the mixing of apples and oranges. Jews in Germany (and elsewhere in Europe during WW II) were deemed negatively, ostracized, then hunted down and eventually murdered, regardless of their political, social status and religious affiliation. Muslim apostates, Muslim secularists or those who just do not follow their belief system in its entirety (Islam 101) are not deemed a threat.
Their numbers however, and the ability of a small cadre of Islam 101’ers to turn huge portions of relatively secularized Muslims into public sharia abiding Muslims, is indeed a worry, with serious historical ramifications. Jews/Judaism is not a proselytizing faith, Islam however, is, and with a manifest destiny attached to it. This is something that Angelis Rameriz is completely ignorant about, or just being a hardened ideologue.
Islam is in fact highly anti-female, very fanatical when taken to its most basic level and is highly dangerous to the non-Muslim. One only needs to take a look around the M.E., Maghreb and elsewhere in the world to see that is the case.]
The right and extreme right, the usual leaders of Islamophobic public discourse, drag the left into it. The left, in turn, fears the resulting loss of votes if the electorate perceives a half-hearted response to an issue that media propaganda is increasingly representing as the true spectre haunting Europe:Islam. Islamophobia is based on four commonplaces. This text counters each one of them.
[TT: ”The Left” that she is referring to, are those who take a traditional dim view on all religions, and view (correctly) that Islam is being much more of a significant problem than the Baptists, Mormons, Hindus and Buddhists. They have rejected the meme that Islam is a religion of piece, and want to secure their hard won freedoms and rights from an ever increasing threat from the followers of that ideology.]
1. “Muslims are…”
There are around 1,570 million Muslims in the world (Pew Research, 2009),distributed among 200 countries and, like the Christian population, extremely heterogeneous from a national and ethnic point of view (only 20% are Arab).Internally, there is significant diversity, not only the major split between Sunnis and Shiites, but also other divisions that correspond to various cultural, jurisprudential, doctrinal and religious traditions, such as those that differentiate Tunisian (10 million adherents) from Chinese Islam (20 million). The heterogeneity of real Muslims clashes with and overrides Islamophobic reductionisms, which claim that the entire Muslim population shares a set of negative characteristics. In short, the object of Islamophobia is quite poorly defined, given the heterogeneity of Muslims. This is the argument to invalidate the first of the bases of Islamophobia.
[TT: German national socialism, Italian fascism, Spanish fascism, Japanese imperial shintosim (which had strong fascistic properties) Islamic canonical Jew hatred (Mufti of J’lem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini) were very diverse, but all contained shared destructive elements. The moment these groups dropped those elements which were very central to their way of being, (Islam never has dropped it) the danger ceased. Jack asses like spuedo scientists in the anthropology departments throughout the West, like Rameriz, are just unable to conceptualize these simple truths.]
2. “Islam leads to violence. Muslims blindly follow religious precepts.”
After the attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, only the mayor of the mid-sized city of Badalona (Spain) openly referred to Islam’s purported predisposition to kill, but many people share the opinion that Islam is bellicose. This idea is unsubstantiated. The Quran and the other sacred texts are loose ethical codes that can either advocate brotherhood or the exact opposite according to how they are interpreted. By analogy, the Bible contains a number of incitements to violence, but it is not commonly claimed that Christianity is intrinsically violent.
[TT: There are plenty of scholars of Islamic history and of Islamic texts that prove Islam is intrinsically anti-non-Muslim, especially anti-Jew and at times when opportunity presents itself, (like today) very very violent towards the non-Muslim. The koran is an open ended book (prescriptive) of incitement and murder of the Jew and the non-Muslim and towards anyone who falls astray from core Islamic beliefs. Hence the 1400 year Sunni-Shiite feud.
The Jewish Torah on the other hand, stories dealing with certain peoples, is descriptive, a historical record telling of Children of Israel. In no way does it command future generations of Jews to seek out the unbeliever and slay them wherever they’re found.]
Furthermore, the idea that the Quran is essential to the lives of Muslim men and women has its origin in colonialism and the Orientalist industry. The concept of the Muslim fanatic clinging to his atavistic customs fed colonial fantasies and domination: the colonialists were fighting a monster that had to be domesticated. This is racism. The relationships between Muslims and their religion are diverse, precisely because of the heterogeneity of interpretations and traditions. Moreover, many people counted among Muslims do not even practice the religion.
[TT: Here Rameriz sets up strawmen in order to strike them down. No one I know of insists that all Muslims follow the koran and other islamic texts to the letter, as Islam expert Robert Spencer tells us repeatedly, all faiths have followers with different levels of religiosity and fervor. Here her (Rameriz) leftist credentials come out like the unfurling of a flag.
Most European forays abroad during the medieval period and in the early 1500’s (and from that time forward) were due to Islamic expansionism (imperialism). If Muslims needed to be domesticated, it was due to their clinging to a violent, supremacist ideology. The Turkish empire was forged upon the proper reading of Islamic texts, conquering new lands for Islam and submitting the unbelievers to the sharia. Being a Spaniard, Rameriz has a stark historical deficit to remedy, Andalus is still a rallying cry for every Islamic supremacist (jihadi) alive today.]
3: “Islam violates the rights of women”.
Muslim doctrinal sources contain statements that can be interpreted and used to oppress women. This is not specific to Islam, however; the same holds true for the Bible and the dominant tradition of the Church Fathers, which is strongly misogynistic and patriarchal.
[TT: More mixing of apples with oranges. Islamic misogyny is codified into Islamic law with clear koranic references as to how women (wives, concubines and slaves) are to be treated. That is what we point to, as well to living examples from around the world, wherever Islam is the dominant force.]
In many Muslim countries, Islam is wielded and instrumentalized to legislate against the rights of people, especially women(e.g., polygamy, repudiation, dress codes). It is no coincidence that these countries have significant democratic and civil rights deficits, which is part of the problem.
[TT: That’s a fact, but what law undergirds (highly influences) the system of jurisprudence of these Muslim countries? The Sharia. The very reason why these countries fail to have a true working, pluralistic, democratic society is that they’re Islam corrupted. Being a student of history is a wonderful thing. George W Bush’s ”democracy project for the M.E. was not the first attempt, the San Remo conference after WW I, was, with all the mandates doled out to the victorious powers to midwife democratic rule to the region in the once Turkish Empire controlled Levant and Maghreb. Only Israel could achieve a real democracy, the Islam corrupted Muslims could not.]
Other non-Muslim dictatorships, like the fascist dictatorship of Franco, also used religion as a basis for political legitimacy and the source for a model of womanhood with legal consequences. In Ireland and Nicaragua, the power of the Church has resulted in the prohibition of abortion. And countries like Thailand and Mexico do not even need religion to maintain a climate of violence and harassment of women. Islam does not, then, create patriarchal systems; rather, it provides a specific language and form of legitimacy, as do other religions and/or gender ideologies in non-Muslim states and societies.
[TT: Islam codifies patriarchal systems into law, as well as other highly detrimental traits, traditions and customs, therein lies the major difference.
4. “Muslim women are forced to wear headscarves; therefore this must be banned in Europe in order to free them from this oppression”.
Leftist militants and feminists often advocate a ban on Islamic attire in Europe reproducing in reverse the prohibitions that they criticize as oppressive claiming that this frees Muslim women. Oddly, it is from a progressive position that they accept the state’s right to ordain how women should dress, purporting to “emancipate” them by taking away their civil rights. Even if a society does not share the religious or social background that leads a woman to adopt the headscarf, this does not empower the state to ban them. Wearing a headscarf or niqab is not a crime and does not increase the likelihood that a woman will commit a crime or belong to a terrorist network.
[TT: There is a good reason as to why totalitarian (nominally secular Muslim regimes in the M.E. banned the wearing of the scarves in public spaces outside the mosque an private homes. They knew, as well as those of us who have become educated on the subject, that Islam is in fact a political ideology. The introduction of the headscarf into the public square is in fact a political act, as much as the sight of groups of Muslim men praying (commandeering) the streets of Europe.
This anthropologist (most likely a leftist feminist) couldn’t care less that many women and girls are in fact forced into wearing these garments, even to the point of being beaten. That some or even many choose to freely wear them, doesn’t take away from the fact that many do not choose to freely wear them, nor from the fact that it’s a political act of intimidation of those who are still clinging to their secular ways.]
When clothing is criminalized,the women who wear it (almost always working class immigrants) are stigmatized and on more than one occasion, this stigmatization manifests itself in serious legal problems. Ultimately, Islamophobia is no more than contemporary racism with a strong classist and sexist component, legitimized socially because it is whitewashed by the discourse about the fight for women’s rights, secularism and anti-terrorism. Let’s prove these arguments wrong and do away with the ”I am an Islamophobe! so what?” position that Brigitte Vasallo wrote about in a previous issue of this journal. Let’s put an end to this impunity once and for all.
[TT: As someone more interested in maintaining our civil classical liberal society and hard won freedoms, I am more interested in those who are pressured and stigmatized by their communities because of their failure to conform to Islamic norms, with many of these cases ending in violence.The claim of ”islamofauxbia” being a race based, is as nonsensical as claiming anti-Christian rhetoric being ”race based”. Real, justified, fear of Islam, based upon the historical record and present day empirical evidence, is a healthy response to the basic self survival impulse everyone of us have. Only hardcore ideologues like Rameriz fail to understand that.]
Can they bring their decapitated heads with them as props?
This is level to which academia has slunk to. At no time in Western history has more people attended ”higher levels of education”, and have become so dumbed down by the mediocrity that passes for staff at prestigious universities. This idiot should be tossed out on his ass.
NOTE: There was a time when people actually learned useful stuff at colleges and Universities. I wonder what this deans POV would be if the student asked about whether pro-Zionist groups would be welcome on campus?
Cornell dean says ISIS welcome on campus in undercover video
By Carl Campanile March 24, 2015 | 10:33pm
Cornell dean says ISIS welcome on campus in undercover video
This guy is either the dumbest Ivy League bigwig ever or politically correct to a fault — for welcoming offers to bring ISIS and Hamas to Cornell University.
A video sting operation shows Cornell’s assistant dean for students, Joseph Scaffido, agreeing to everything suggested by an undercover muckraker posing as a Moroccan student.
Scaffido casually endorses inviting an ISIS “freedom fighter’’ to conduct a “training camp” for students at the upstate Ithaca campus — bizarrely likening the activity to a sports camp.
Is it OK to bring a humanitarian pro-“Islamic State Iraq and Syria” group on campus, the undercover for conservative activist James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas asks.
Sure, Scaffido says in the recorded March 16 meeting.
Scaffido doesn’t even blink an eye when the undercover asks about providing material support for terrorists — “care packages, whether it be food, water, electronics.”
How about supporting Hamas?
No problem at all, Scaffido said.
The usual vaporings from the academic (hack) spinmeister.
Any such ”seclusion” from society, resulted from too much Islam.
– I see this primarily as an attack by a few deranged man, which they are quite happy to see themselves as part of the large world-wide struggle between good and evil. And apparently their opinion they are on the good side.
– When you consider that in the background, these are disturbed people, so there is a lot of pent-up aggression, experiencing society and the environment in some way hostile, looking for a target, which insulted and annoyed them.
Häme-Anttila, the background to the attack is not from the cause of religion, but of societal segregation.
– People do not make violent acts purely for ideological reasons, in the background there is the whole human psychological situation, he could explain things to himself that the white race is the best, so lets go beat up some immigrants. Yes, it comes from the internal situation of the individual, ideology is glued on top.
NOTE: I prefer looking at these Islam 101’ers as jihadi bounty hunters with an al-Qaida hit list.
UPDATE: The Finnish version of the article includes this line not reprinted in the English version of the same article (h/t: Vasara Hammer)
Now, if it’s generalized a bit, this has been a breeding ground for the anti-jihad movement for a long time. It is not very surprising that the number of immigrants in Finland, in this situation, has come to carry out Jihad. Their integration into Finnish society may not be in their opinion, possible, in such a racist atmosphere, says Suutarinen.
So this idiot of a professor is blaming those of us in the Counter-jihad, who highlight the actions of their (Finnish Muslims) co-religionists, what they think, say and do in accordance to Islamic dictates, as being responsible for the jihadis ”not integrating” into Finnish society. It’s kind of like the media, police and armchair pundits being blamed for the failure of criminals to successively integrate themselves into society, due to insistence of others reporting on crime statistics.
NOTE: It’s interesting that they left out the mention of ”the Counter-Jihad” in the English version of the article.
Why cite facts when (baseless) claims are enough?
Of course, the Yle article fails to give concrete examples of this supposed ”racial intolerance”, yet deliver the following as sign of trouble with Finnish youth:
In studies of school attainment, Suutarinen said around 10 percent of young people have described themselves as being “ready to take part in illegal activity”. Over two percent said they are critical towards immigrants and towards their rights. This represents a sharp increase since the year 2000, Suutarinen said.
Excuse me? You mean 90% of Finnish youth achieving higher education would not be willing to partake in any ”illegal activity” (something of which is left undefined) nor would 98% be critical of immigrants and their rights? That’s a sign of a growing problem? How does that compare to the national average?
NOTE: Please do take note of the professor’s assertion that it’s a great idea to teach Islam in schools, period, let alone making everyone sit through it.
An associate professor from the University of Jyväskylä has warned that levels of racial intolerance among Finnish boys have been rising since the turn of the millennium.
Speaking on youth attitudes at the Central Finland Future Forum conference, Sakari Suutarinen said that an international comparison found that Finnish boys held the most intolerant views towards immigrants out of 38 countries studied.
”School attainment tests show that over recent decades critical attitudes towards immigrants are growing in Finland among young boys, and that the same group has negative attitudes towards all other ethnic groups,” Suutarinen said.
He added that anti-immigrant feeling among young people has hardened since the turn of the millennium.
Suutarinen went on to call on both immigrant communities as well as the majority population to act against growing divisions within society.
”It’s entirely right to demand from our Muslim population that they sit up and take notice of possible youth radicalisation, for instance. Muslim society must take steps to stop people leaving for war, and must take responsibility for spreading peace. The same also applies of course to the majority population,” he said.
Suutarinen criticised schools for not doing more to encourage understanding between different sections of the population. “I believe it is a real shame that for instance Muslims and Christians are divided into separate religious studies classes at school. It’s extremely rare to find this in a western country,” he said.
He called on schools to do more to encourage understanding, and give young people an outlet to discuss and explore their views on difficult social issues.
”One solution is to go back to speaking about these issues in school. When we don’t have a school democracy where on earth can young people go to talk and form common ideas and take part in a democratic process?”
He added: “There’s a vast difference with other Nordic countries, where they have school councils. In Finland they are being driven down. Fortunately we are still obliged by law to have student bodies, but their remits are significantly more limited.”
Suutarinen also pointed to research which claims that increasing young people in Finland say they are disposed to take part in antisocial behaviour.
In studies of school attainment, Suutarinen said around 10 percent of young people have described themselves as being “ready to take part in illegal activity”. Over two percent said they are critical towards immigrants and towards their rights. This represents a sharp increase since the year 2000, Suutarinen said.
He said that youth attitudes do not necessarily lead to illegal behaviour, but that they risk being inflamed should the right social or economic circumstances emerge.
”For example if the situation in one area deteriorates then a large group of young people could very quickly find themselves turning to antisocial behaviour,” he warned.