this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
28 points (96.7% liked)

Islamic Leftism

171 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to Islamic Leftism, a space for muslims leftists.

Lemmygrad rules apply:

  1. No capitalist apologia / anti-communism.
  2. No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  3. Be respectful. This is a safe space where all comrades should feel welcome, this includes a warning against uncritical sectarianism.
  4. No porn or sexually explicit content (even if marked NSFW).
  5. No right-deviationists (patsocs, nazbols, strasserists, duginists, etc).
  6. No class reductionism

Rules for Islamic leftism:

  1. No discrimination against other faiths or to those who lack it

  2. No uncritical judging, always look for the cause of things before doing judgement

  3. No compulsion in acceptance of the religion, if someone decides to leave or enter Islam let them for Allah is all-Knowing all-Wise and all-Forgiving

  4. No takfir ( excommunication ) against the innocent believers or other persons who don't share the same beliefs or ideas

  5. No treachery, show kindness to others even if they are mean to you

  6. Be always open to different jurisprudence or schools in Islam

  7. No discrimination against different schools or sects in the religion and outside of it. Is better to be united and in harmony

  8. Be respectful to eachother be it religious or non-religious, believer or non-believer

All of you are welcomed to join

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

1830s headline: "Indian savages caught chanting 'death to white people'; genocide against them now considered self-defense."

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've said it before, and I'll say it til these lungs are airless: "terrorist" is nothing more than the 21st century "savage" in the way the crackers weaponize it against people.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (3 children)

When we create, they call us copy right breaking thieves. When they kill us, they call us weaklings who can't defend themselves. When we starve, they tell us we can't live without the white man. When we fight, they call us terrorists. and we build something, they calls us a dictatorship regime. and just like we say in Algeria "Yetnako"

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

This reminds me of a video portraying Tencent as le evil mastermind corpo from the movies, which starts by saying how they never made something original, just copies. Then goes on to say how their version of ICQ was a) adapted to Chinese internet b) had extra features. I wonder what Chinese companies should've done according to him, just accept that ICQ solved chatting once and for all? Of course that's a stupid question because he's just fearmongering/spreading propaganda, but still..

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

parenti quote applies to all the colonized, not just commies.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

The quote

In the United States, for over a hundred years, the ruling interests tirelessly propagated anticommunism among the populace, until it became more like a religious orthodoxy than a political analysis. During the Cold War, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

-- Michael Parenti, Blackshirts And Reds

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the admins of this instance if you have any questions or concerns.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago