How come so few?!
Posted on 02/25/2015 10:21:20 AM PST by NRx
This morning the BBC published details of a major poll of the attitudes of Britain’s Muslims. The headline on the front of the BBC website linking to the research states: “Muslims ‘oppose cartoon reprisals’”. This of course relates to attitudes within the Muslim community towards the recent Charlie Hebdo attacks.
It’s a reassuring headline. It’s also wrong. Many Muslims - a majority - do indeed utterly oppose the murderous killings in Paris. But a very, very large number of Muslims don’t. Presented with the statement “I have some sympathy for the motives behind the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris”, 27 seven percent agreed with the statement. A further 2 per cent refused to answer the question. And an additional eight percent said they were unsure whether they had some sympathy or not.
That is a shocking figure. And an utterly shaming one for Britain’s Muslim community. If this poll is accurate, over a quarter of British Muslims overtly sympathise with the motives of those responsible for the cold blooded murder of 16 journalists, police officers and Jews.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Agree wholeheartedly, although the analogies are more difficult. An ideological purity test is going to be messy... but it's been tried before. See party "loyalty oaths" in Germany and Russia and China.
I have enough sympathy to want those terrorists executed painlessly, along with those who trained them and those who funded them. As for their supporters, I have enough sympathy to want them shipped to a country more in keeping with their values. Perhaps ISIS wants them as guests for the next barbecue.
Oh, I'm not suggesting any such thing. The only way to combat bad ideas is with good ideas. "Political Correctness" and "Non Judgementalism" are bad ideas that are intended to make it more difficult for good ideas to propagate.
What I'm saying - and not very well - is that the ecological system of ideas, and the mechanisms that have been developed by civilization for finding the truth, defending the truth, and purging anti-truths (superstitions, lies, propaganda, etc.) are under attack.
Political correctness/nonjudgementalism is an attack on the basic act of generalization. "Prejudice" is simply a word that is applied to a type of generalization that one group or another doesn't like. P-C is an attack on all generalization, which makes it an attack on one of the basic modalities of human intellectual activity in the search of knowledge and insight, and the survival value those things confer.
I take it “British Muslims” aren’t really Brits. They’re just Muzzies that infest Great Britain.
How come so few?!
It is utterly shameful that formerly Great Britain has allowed a Muslim community to exist and grow.
This is a very important observation about PC. It's aimed at total control of deductive reasoning about your environment, particularly the political environment as its presented.
Your comment on prejudice is a bit less profound, in the sense that while prejudice can prevent deductive thought on a particular aspect of our surroundings (e.g., "Staticstically, blacks have lower IQs and are more prone to violent crime than other races"), it can also work in the other direction. That is, one might be deliberately blind to facts out there. So one can speak of prejudice being either prescriptive or descriptive. Descriptive is OK, Prescriptive is PC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.