My question is, why do we constantly lend credence to their hateful ideas? Why constantly report on how they feel as if they’re the standard bearer of…—well, as if their opinion even mattered? We don’t get constant updates when other hateful organizations are upset over the people they try to oppress. Normalize ignoring these people.
It depends on what you’re saying. People—especially people from the US—very quickly move from/confuse criticizing Islam as an inherently flawed organized religion to straight up Islamophobia. After 9/11 Islamophobia was pretty much institutionalized, so most US people online today either grew up in that or grew up in a more racist/intolerant time because they’re older.
There is a difference. But people don’t know how to deal in nuance on the internet. So “hey, I think Israel is committing genocide” gets funneled into straight up antisemitism. The same is true for criticizing Islam. Or any religion. Or any thing. People try to out-righteous each other and end up on the wrong side of prejudice. Well…I guess there’s no right side of prejudice. But you know what I mean.
The only thing I disagree with is your use of the word “confuse”. They aren’t confused, they know what they are doing. It really isn’t that hard to keep two ideas in your head
People should be allowed to have whatever religion they want
Religions are shit
Islam has the second highest body count of any religion. More people have died from it than every religion of humanity accept Christianity. It is fundamentally, on the text level, a violent faith. That doesnt mean anything about people born into it. You can have a violent god and not be a violent person.
I dunno. Maybe I just think people are dumber and more susceptible to crafting an online identity that is “more” than other people with the same identity. But who knows, maybe you’re right and people know they’re being racist, antisemitic, etc.
What’s that old saying? Never assume malice when ignorance is possible? Something to that effect. I think people get so lost (completely unwittingly) in crafting their online identities. They see people or outlets they like pushing a certain viewpoint, and these people naturally want to be more of that identity. It’s being completely unoriginal, unthinking while also craving “unique” identity within the circles they see. They want those upvotes, those likes, that engagement, and see 60% of a concept, so lean toward 100%—the problem with this stupid kind of thinking is that 60% is a just, humanistic view (or, on the right, an angry, couched view) while 100% is full blown prejudice.
There’s no one answer, but I firmly believe this accounts for a good amount of the ignorance we see online these days.
I’ve seen a lot of criticism towards Islam from positions of defending secularism and opposing fanaticism, which I think is neat. If I see someone attacking Muslims from positions of bigotry, I don’t think that’s so neat. Do you understand the difference?
My question is, why do we constantly lend credence to their hateful ideas? Why constantly report on how they feel as if they’re the standard bearer of…—well, as if their opinion even mattered? We don’t get constant updates when other hateful organizations are upset over the people they try to oppress. Normalize ignoring these people.
Go ahead and say anything about Islam on lemmy and see how fast it gets taken down.
It depends on what you’re saying. People—especially people from the US—very quickly move from/confuse criticizing Islam as an inherently flawed organized religion to straight up Islamophobia. After 9/11 Islamophobia was pretty much institutionalized, so most US people online today either grew up in that or grew up in a more racist/intolerant time because they’re older.
There is a difference. But people don’t know how to deal in nuance on the internet. So “hey, I think Israel is committing genocide” gets funneled into straight up antisemitism. The same is true for criticizing Islam. Or any religion. Or any thing. People try to out-righteous each other and end up on the wrong side of prejudice. Well…I guess there’s no right side of prejudice. But you know what I mean.
The only thing I disagree with is your use of the word “confuse”. They aren’t confused, they know what they are doing. It really isn’t that hard to keep two ideas in your head
Islam has the second highest body count of any religion. More people have died from it than every religion of humanity accept Christianity. It is fundamentally, on the text level, a violent faith. That doesnt mean anything about people born into it. You can have a violent god and not be a violent person.
You just said something bad about Islam on Lemmy 4 hours ago, and it isn’t taken down yet.
I dunno. Maybe I just think people are dumber and more susceptible to crafting an online identity that is “more” than other people with the same identity. But who knows, maybe you’re right and people know they’re being racist, antisemitic, etc.
What’s that old saying? Never assume malice when ignorance is possible? Something to that effect. I think people get so lost (completely unwittingly) in crafting their online identities. They see people or outlets they like pushing a certain viewpoint, and these people naturally want to be more of that identity. It’s being completely unoriginal, unthinking while also craving “unique” identity within the circles they see. They want those upvotes, those likes, that engagement, and see 60% of a concept, so lean toward 100%—the problem with this stupid kind of thinking is that 60% is a just, humanistic view (or, on the right, an angry, couched view) while 100% is full blown prejudice.
There’s no one answer, but I firmly believe this accounts for a good amount of the ignorance we see online these days.
I’ve seen a lot of criticism towards Islam from positions of defending secularism and opposing fanaticism, which I think is neat. If I see someone attacking Muslims from positions of bigotry, I don’t think that’s so neat. Do you understand the difference?