Is there a Moderate Form of Political Islam?

[arewethereyet]

Islam Lite?

[Leonardo17]

^I must have missed something. What does all the stuff about fighter jets have to do with whether there is such a thing as a politically moderate Islamist government?

Boru

   The way they operate is quite universal.
 
Ex: Iran has a fighter jet called Hesa Qowsar. Based on US F-5 fighters:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HESA_Kowsar
 
   A complete piece of junk if you ask me. But it’s like Kim Yon Un and his nuclear missiles. Political Islamists + authoritarian regimes love displaying new weapons. In Freudian terms this is like their “penis” issues.
 
   Our Kaan fighter jet is not a piece of junk. That’s not what I am saying. What I am saying is that it is the result of a century of investment into avionics that was started by the secular founder of the Turkish Republic. Yet these …s are acting as if it was the result of their efforts.
 
So I am putting them back to their place and I am shedding light on how they operate in a bid to win the hearts of people who are less informed than me on these issues

---

---

Technically, there is such a thing as moderate fascism. It’s just called conservatism.

I am not a conservative hater. 
 
Ex: Mrs. Angela Merkel's party (Christian Democrats) was a conservative party as well. Yet, she her policies (like the taking in of a million Syrian refugees while France only took some 20,000) was very progressive.
 
Yet Populism (right wing populism, left wing populism, racist populism, socialist populism, Religious, Neo-Liberal Populism, Political Islamist populism etc…) is something else and that’s what I am trying to show.

---

---

arewethereyet:

Islam Lite?

Here is a short explanatory video on this:

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

@Leonardo17

Political Islamists + authoritarian regimes love displaying new weapons. In Freudian terms this is like their “penis” issues. 

Simply because a regime puts on military displays doesn’t make it authoritarian.

Informed people don’t take Freud seriously.

Boru

[Leonardo17]

Islam Lite?

@Leonardo17

Political Islamists + authoritarian regimes love displaying new weapons. In Freudian terms this is like their “penis” issues. 

Simply because a regime puts on military displays doesn’t make it authoritarian.

Informed people don’t take Freud seriously.

Boru

Sorry, I wanted to say that this Kaan Airplane was a result of continued investments into modern aviation technologies since the Year 1925. And this locally produced fighter jet has been the holy grail of our aviation industries for decades. So this is like a dream coming true.
(I don’t know why I said “Avionics” – But it’s true that we are not so bad in that either)
 
So here is a picture of the founder of our republic with our actual first locally built airplane (a glider airplane) dated to 1933. (I could go on and on with the distortions of political islamist propaganda). One of is devices was: "The future is in the skies"


 
 
On Freudian issues:
 
As far as I know of, most democracies are not that interested in things like military parades etc. If I am correct it was Mr. Donald Trump who wanted to introduce them in America during his mandate. The French do it in the 14th of July. We used to do it on special days (like October 29th – The anniversary of the declaration of the Republic). But in these events the goal is not really to intimidate anyone or try to scare neighboring countries. It’s just a part of the show.
 
Anyway: My argument is that authoritarian / populist elements in any geography and in any form, like to intimidate people with their weapon. And they also like to take the things that were done thanks to decades of works before them and say: “See what I did? See what I did?”
 
And this takes us to the title of this thread: President Erdogan is claiming to be a “moderate” political Islamist or more of a typical / classical conservative-democratic ruler. To this I will answer that people are going to the polls in places like Syria and Russia too.
 
So I’m defining a pattern. A typical democratic ruler may not always show up with things like “look I built an airplane”, “Hey look, I sent a man to space”. Usually they are less visible but informed people in the country know in their hearts that this man (or woman) did produce a great deal of efforts for his/her citizens.
 
Here is a quote from the Dao de Ching:
 
“The best rulers are scarcely known by their subjects;
The next best are loved and praised;
The next are feared;
The next despised:
They have no faith in their people,
And their people become unfaithful to them.
 
When the best rulers achieve their purpose
Their subjects claim the achievement as their own.”
 
So I don’t know if you are getting my sense of humor in the video but what I am trying to say is that (and that works for many of us) Him and all other populist / nationalistic / political İslamist are usually in the fourth category.
 
And I am saying this as a rather patriotic non-atheistic person

[Anomalocaris]

It appears it is not true that there is no moderate Islam.   There certainly was,  but its moderation did it no good against European colonialism and as a result it fell out of grace against more vigorously grass root anti-colonial fundamentalist revival movements of the 19th century. 

Islam actually did mellow out in good parts of the Islamic world from 13-18th century, for example in the modern Indonesian peninsular,   Where arrival of Islam not only didn’t lead to women having to go about about wearing face covering, but they in fact customarily went about topless, and foreign traders from Europe, India, China, etc. commented on the forgiving social moral and very friendly local women.

Modern conservative fundamentalist Islam arose partly out of ulema of Ahl-i Hadith anti-colonial movement against the Dutch in the East Indies in the late 18th and 19th century.     The author Simon Winchester also posited a strong Dutch East Indies link to the near simultaneous rise of anti-colonial Islamic revivalist movements such as Salaffya movement in Arabia.

The rise and strengthening of Islamic fundamentalist movements as a anti-colonial response in the 18-19 century will find a replay in the 20th century, as a seemingly more vigorous and grass route response to the failure of modernist secularist pan-Arab movements failure to deal with what is perceived as symbol of continued modern European colonial domination of the Islamic world symbolized by the imposition of the state of Israel.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It appears it is not true that there is no moderate Islam.   There certainly was,  but its moderation did it no good against European colonialism and as a result it fell out of grace against more vigorously grass root anti-colonial fundamentalist revival movements of the 19th century. 

Islam actually did mellow out in good parts of the Islamic world from 13-18th century, for example in the modern Indonesian peninsular,   Where arrival of Islam not only didn’t lead to women having to go about about wearing face covering, but they in fact customarily went about topless, and foreign traders from Europe, India, China, etc. commented on the forgiving social moral and very friendly local women.

Modern conservative fundamentalist Islam arose partly out of ulema of Ahl-i Hadith anti-colonial movement against the Dutch in the East Indies in the late 18th and 19th century.     The author Simon Winchester also posited a strong Dutch East Indies link to the near simultaneous rise of anti-colonial Islamic revivalist movements such as Salaffya movement in Arabia.

The rise and strengthening of Islamic fundamentalist movements as a anti-colonial response in the 18-19 century will find a replay in the 20th century, as a seemingly more vigorous and grass route response to the failure of modernist secularist pan-Arab movements failure to deal with what is perceived as symbol of continued modern European colonial domination of the Islamic world symbolized by the imposition of the state of Israel.

(Bold mine)

Is there a Time Machine involved?

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

@Leonardo17

My argument is that authoritarian / populist elements in any geography and in any form, like to intimidate people with their weapon.

But the converse is not necessarily true. Because authoritarians intimidate people via displays of weaponry doesn’t mean that anyone who does so is an authoritarian.

Boru

[Anomalocaris]

Authoritarian governments tend to gain power on the back of a popular sense of vulnerability, if the sense derive from direct or indirect foreign vulnerability, or from a sense that the future requires acting independently or against some elite or cabal of privileged international players, then the show of military strength is a natural resort.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Authoritarian governments tend to gain power on the back of a popular sense of vulnerability, if the sense derive from direct or indirect foreign vulnerability, or from a sense that the future requires acting independently or against some elite or cabal of privileged international players, then the show of military strength is a natural resort.

Again, I’m not saying ONLY authoritarian regimes do that, just that a show of military hardware isn’t enough to label a particular regime as authoritarian.

Boru

[brewer]

Coming in late, why would a moderate islamic believer need to be political? The same could be applied to christians, especially in the US.