= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on [POLITICS] Jihadism and a new kind of existential threat - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (143)
Toxic religions do exist, and they can become existential threats. Frankly I don't have a problem with stomping on Islam - HARD! - before we see land wars with Muslim armies on the European continent again. I also favor immigration restrictions to keep Muslims out of Western countries.
We really should put more effort into studying and learning from history as a corrective to fantasizing about transhuman futures. The experience of applying prophylaxis to Islam as a nuisance cult could come in handy for dealing with this sort of thing if another dangerous religion emerges in a few centuries.
The country with the largest Muslim population in the world is Indonesia. Followed by India. Go stomp.
Could you at least pretend like you are trying to engage in reasonable debate.
The Indonesian Muslims are for the most part not the ones being problematic. As for India, the Indian Hindus are already (mostly) dealing with the problematic Indian Muslims.
I would think this complaint is better directed at advancedatheist than Lumifer. If advancedatheist had some specific subset of Muslims in mind, they could & should have been more specific than "Islam", "Muslims" and European land wars with unspecified "Muslim armies".
It was pretty clear from context what he meant.
I submit that it wasn't in fact clear that advancedatheist was referring to the specific subset of Islam/Muslims you have in mind, as evidenced by
I also notice advancedatheist didn't respond to Lumifer or NancyLebovitz along the lines of "you're misunderstanding/misrepresenting me, I actually only mean such-and-such a subset of Muslims".
Not with this beginning, I couldn't.
If the point of this comment is that the US, or the west in general, does not have the power to invade these countries, given the political will, then I'd say this is factually wrong.
I believe the primary point was that these aren't the countries where problematic Islamic extremists are apparently centered. But there may be a bit of a deliberate ambiguity on Lumifer's part on what the point was.
I suspect that the point was that the typical Muslim, insofar as there is such a thing, is not an arab. The founder was an arab, the Muslims on American TV are almost all arabs, but in the modern world the two concepts are less related than one might think.
Why on Earth would the West want to invade Indonesia and/or India?
Well, I think advancedatheist wants them to.