You need a plane ticket to Detroit, stat. What you've said is exactly 0% applicable to the Muslim community there, and it's sizable.
Exactly! Some people are just reading the wrong shit that is passed around on Facebook I guess. Send him to Detroit like you said. More specifically...Dearborn MI. Just go to youtube and type "Muslim Dearborn" and just watch. Here is one for you... Dearborn MI - ( New Window )
I'd like to see something a little more nuanced. Drive through Palisades Park, NJ sometime. 40% Korean, with signs in Korean on a lot of storefronts. While that might show that assimilation is happening slower or only partially, there hasn't been a suicide bombing to date.
RE: RE: Immigrant families lose their native identification
as they move from generation to generation. My nephews grew up in California and they don't identify as Italian at all. And they are Italian on both sides--third and fourth generation.
A study showed young Jews living out West do not really have any identification with Israel. That was unheard of when I was growing up in Brooklyn.
NY is such an immigrant city that people don't realize the rest of the country is not like that. The next generation of Muslims will not have a strong identification with religion. They will think of themselves as Americans first and foremost.
Persecuting them or singling them out is the best way to get them NOT to identify as Americans and become a diaspora, holding onto to religious instead of a national identity.
Best way to defeat terrorism longterm is to treat the causes not the symptoms.
While that certainly is more the case here than in Europe, you are not getting the same degree of assimilation as in generations past. The ease of travel back to their country of origin as well as some segments of society advocating that they NOT assimilate, that assimilation is cultural fascism (hyperbole conceded) and the ability to function in this country without speaking English makes things different than before.
Eh, I had family who lived in this country for 50+ years and never learned 50 words of English. In modern society, with all of the common media that bind us together and reduced prejudice/exclusiveness etc., I think 2nd generation assimilation is likely more robust than it was 100 years ago. It's just that current problems seem bigger than problems that you cant remember. Much like people who feel like the world is more dangerous and out of control, when it is safer than it has ever been.
The notions of assimilation are taken for granted...
for instance, second-generation Hispanic immigrants from certain countries actually do worse in certain metrics than first-generation, most notably crime rate. Especially with the de-emphasis on any sort of distinctly American cultural heritage, it's not clear that assimilation will continue to be a priority.
Of course there is an argument to be made that our tradition of assimilation was always overstated, that immigrants often returned to their countries of origin, that pockets of native language enclaves persisted for decades after arrival going as far back as the early Nineteenth Century.
But on the balance, the pressures to assimilate aren't necessarily what they were at earlier points in our history, it's not necessarily a safe assumption that the present and future will resemble the past.
In case anyone's interested, Sam Harris has a well reasoned and intelligent take on the matter of radical islam. His podcast is called Waking Up, on iTunes or google it.
Sam Harris does an excellent job on this topic.
It just stuns and dismays me how reasoned discourse is almost completely absent from this incredibly serious global problem. Harris is probably most famous in this matter for his ridiculous exchange with Ben Aflack on Bill Maher. I mean, an actor of really average intelligence and with zero education or knowledge on the matter gets serious traction and support by hurling absurd accusations of bigotry and racism (as if religion were a race!). We see some of that here on BBI where people aren't even willing to acknowledge the most obvisou and indisputable facts of the problem.
Anyway, I'm glad there's people like Sam Harris fighting the good fight. I am afraid, however, we're very clearly losing the war.
Generally I think the pressure to assimilate is greater now
You have fewer enclaves of immigrants where you can get by with no assimilation. 120 years ago a Jew getting off the boat at Ellis Island could go to a neighborhood where a critical mass of people spoke yiddish. You rented an apartment from someone who spoke the language, and didnt have to deal with a power company, a cable company, a cell phone company, big box stores etc, where it's largely English only (or +Spanish maybe). There was a yiddish newspaper. You had no designs on a job outside the neighborhood -- you were going to be a vendor, clerk, etc. for a yiddish speaker. The customers you dealt with were going to be yiddish speakers.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
I think we overstate what assimilation was. And should not just assume that assimilation will happen. I probably disagree with any notion that assimilation was some sort of device where non-European immigrants were put into the machine on one end and popped out like a white, rural/suburban 5th generation WASP on the other end (I know Dune didnt say that). I think it was always messier than that.
on the one hand, the assumption that everyone will assimilate because we did in the past is a poor one for a variety of reasons, and it accepts a pretty caricatured view of immigration history. On the other hand, the assumption that Muslims (or Hispanics, if that's your bugaboo) are uniquely incapable of assimilation is unreasonable; as Deej points out there are unique challenges in this day and age but unique pressures to at least learn language that may not have existed in the days of yore.
There are special pressures on Muslims re assimilation
You cant ignore the religious gap. Hispanics come here and can sit side by side in the pews of a Catholic church with an Irish family whose ancestors came over during the potato famine. They can eat in the same restaurants too.
Muslims cant do that. In particular, an observant Muslim has to eat halal food. If you grew up in a country where halal food predominated, it's no problem there. Here it is hard. Same thing I see with orthodox jews. Either you go to their restaurants, or you cant break bread with them. They cant go to the neighbors for dinner. Etc.
And then you have the prejudice and fear of course. It's an issue that cant be ignored on the assimilation question. It makes it harder.
RE: Generally I think the pressure to assimilate is greater now
You have fewer enclaves of immigrants where you can get by with no assimilation. 120 years ago a Jew getting off the boat at Ellis Island could go to a neighborhood where a critical mass of people spoke yiddish. You rented an apartment from someone who spoke the language, and didnt have to deal with a power company, a cable company, a cell phone company, big box stores etc, where it's largely English only (or +Spanish maybe). There was a yiddish newspaper. You had no designs on a job outside the neighborhood -- you were going to be a vendor, clerk, etc. for a yiddish speaker. The customers you dealt with were going to be yiddish speakers.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
You now get ballots in 6-8 languages. Your cable company offers stations in a multitude of languages. You don't have to watch American television (which may not be a bad thing). Most hospitals now have the ability to deal with many different languages (a good thing). And 150 years ago once you were over here you were generally here to stay, with contact with the old country being letters (at best) as opposed to a cellular phone contract with low rates to the place you left.
RE: There are special pressures on Muslims re assimilation
You cant ignore the religious gap. Hispanics come here and can sit side by side in the pews of a Catholic church with an Irish family whose ancestors came over during the potato famine. They can eat in the same restaurants too.
Muslims cant do that. In particular, an observant Muslim has to eat halal food. If you grew up in a country where halal food predominated, it's no problem there. Here it is hard. Same thing I see with orthodox jews. Either you go to their restaurants, or you cant break bread with them. They cant go to the neighbors for dinner. Etc.
And then you have the prejudice and fear of course. It's an issue that cant be ignored on the assimilation question. It makes it harder.
The religious difference is undoubtedly important (as with Judaism though there are umpteen Muslims of varying degrees of piety for whom these dietary prohibitions are honored in whole, in part or not at all). There are also simply the social and religious pressures against conformity. Social pressures against conformity existed in varying degrees and forms for all immigrants, but the promise of some sort of divine retribution for assimilation is rather unique.
RE: RE: Generally I think the pressure to assimilate is greater now
You have fewer enclaves of immigrants where you can get by with no assimilation. 120 years ago a Jew getting off the boat at Ellis Island could go to a neighborhood where a critical mass of people spoke yiddish. You rented an apartment from someone who spoke the language, and didnt have to deal with a power company, a cable company, a cell phone company, big box stores etc, where it's largely English only (or +Spanish maybe). There was a yiddish newspaper. You had no designs on a job outside the neighborhood -- you were going to be a vendor, clerk, etc. for a yiddish speaker. The customers you dealt with were going to be yiddish speakers.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
You now get ballots in 6-8 languages. Your cable company offers stations in a multitude of languages. You don't have to watch American television (which may not be a bad thing). Most hospitals now have the ability to deal with many different languages (a good thing). And 150 years ago once you were over here you were generally here to stay, with contact with the old country being letters (at best) as opposed to a cellular phone contract with low rates to the place you left.
Yes, you can list things. Now wrap them up into an analysis. 120 years ago you could read the Forward (yiddish newspaper). Doctors didnt do much, you couldnt afford them, and it's likely there was some jewish doctor in the neighborhood (even if not US trained).
Im not saying that the balance is totally on once side here. But I think pretending that back then you were forced to assimilate and now there is no pressure I think is just wrong. I've laid out my point.
It's overly simplistic to say that assimilation was just an easy thing
for any Europeans. By 19th/early 20th century standards, for example, most Italians weren't considered to be truly white Europeans. In fact, I have a copy of my great-grandmother's naturalization certificate from the '30s. Under "race", it says Northern Italian. There's no country of North Italy. It was a distinction drawn because, by the beliefs of the time, there was a tangible racial difference between an immigrant from, say, Piemonte or Liguria and one from Sicily or Calabria. My grandfather has mentioned the same thing to me - his father was very insistent on the superiority of northern Italians. Today we see that as ridiculous, but it was a very real distinction at the time.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Immigrant families lose their native identification
You need a plane ticket to Detroit, stat. What you've said is exactly 0% applicable to the Muslim community there, and it's sizable.
Exactly! Some people are just reading the wrong shit that is passed around on Facebook I guess. Send him to Detroit like you said. More specifically...Dearborn MI. Just go to youtube and type "Muslim Dearborn" and just watch. Here is one for you... Dearborn MI - ( New Window )
I'd like to see something a little more nuanced. Drive through Palisades Park, NJ sometime. 40% Korean, with signs in Korean on a lot of storefronts. While that might show that assimilation is happening slower or only partially, there hasn't been a suicide bombing to date.
Koreans don't worship a God that wants them to kill non-Koreans, and base a large part of their religion(s) on emulating a violent and intolerant warlord.
You have to address the beliefs in the orthodoxy and the authority it gives its practitioners. Koreans will assimilate, like most others, because their religious convictions are not in conflict with those of our societies.
And there are no "reformed" Muslims per se. At least according to the orthodoxy. There are "bad" Muslims and apostates only, depending on their lack of practice or having left the religion. Yes, of course there are millions of Muslims that have attenuated their convictions based on cultural exposure to more universal human rights, and chosen to ignore much of what is in the religious texts.
But this is a hundreds of millions of people problem, once you widen the religious-based beliefs from martyrdom, down through jihad, to more common problems of jew and non-Muslim hatred and religious supremacy, women's rights, gay rights, child marriage and FGM (in some cultures), honor-killing, etc.
It takes serious religious beliefs to make people treat each other so inhumanely. And it's time to have adult conversations about the core texts inspiring and validating them. And to stop treating people as victims all the time (which of course many of them are, of their own co-religionists, but not from "Islamophobia).
To the extent assimilation is a problem, and I think it's a way overstated red herrings, the real problem is then, what happens when assimilation fails. Finding ways to assimlate people is a waste of time and, I think at least, smacks of blaming the victim and places an additional, and again, my opinion, untoward burden on the state and the people who already live in it.
People have failed to assimilate for generations upon generations. The root cause of the problem is the essential values of islam, mostly the primacy of its theocracy over the secular rule of law, are fundementally in opposition to the precepts of Western modernity. Sorry if this offends Ben Aflack, but it's clearly the conclusion to which any reasonable person examining the facts will arrive.
This is, of course, purely anecdotal. However.....while my great-grandparents never became nearly as fluent in English as they were in Italian, and would generally speak to each other in Italian, they always spoke English with their children. In fact, my grandfather could speak little Italian despite being raised by two natives. They actually forbade him from it because they were insistent that their children be fully American. Becoming a "real American" was an obsession for them, as it was for most immigrants and their children according to him. Not sure that's quite the same case today.
Store signs in Arabic and Middle Eastern restaurants are threatening? I don't think so. Hence my request for nuance and comparison to Palisades Park.
Yeah, walk thru Williamsburg and you see signs in Hebrew. Walk thru Chinatown and you see signs in Chinese. Lower East Side (no longer super jewish), Williamsburg, and Chinatown all have populations equal/bigger than Dearborn.
This is, of course, purely anecdotal. However.....while my great-grandparents never became nearly as fluent in English as they were in Italian, and would generally speak to each other in Italian, they always spoke English with their children. In fact, my grandfather could speak little Italian despite being raised by two natives. They actually forbade him from it because they were insistent that their children be fully American. Becoming a "real American" was an obsession for them, as it was for most immigrants and their children according to him. Not sure that's quite the same case today.
Yeah that may be true for some current immigrants but I wouldnt paint with too broad a brush. I would be interested in seeing polling on comparative attitudes among immigrant populations.
why do you think it is the immigrant that is the one refusing the assimilate instead of the society in the country that will always consider them aliens
in England you can be 3rd Generation Bangladeshi ( originally Immigrating because Indian used to be a British Colony ) and NEVER ever be accepted as British.
If you are from Morocco decent and your family has lived in France for 60 years
you still will NEVER be considered French -- the racism and exclusion permeates these societies.
In US you don't have radicalization like you do in Europe because it doesn't matter where you come from .. as soon as you get your Passport you are considered as American as someone whose family came over in the Mayflower.
RE: RE: Mike - Did you click on the link I responded to?
Store signs in Arabic and Middle Eastern restaurants are threatening? I don't think so. Hence my request for nuance and comparison to Palisades Park.
Yeah, walk thru Williamsburg and you see signs in Hebrew. Walk thru Chinatown and you see signs in Chinese. Lower East Side (no longer super jewish), Williamsburg, and Chinatown all have populations equal/bigger than Dearborn.
Hell, what about restaurant signs in French, Italian and Spanish?
In case anyone's interested, Sam Harris has a well reasoned and intelligent take on the matter of radical islam. His podcast is called Waking Up, on iTunes or google it.
Sam Harris does an excellent job on this topic.
It just stuns and dismays me how reasoned discourse is almost completely absent from this incredibly serious global problem. Harris is probably most famous in this matter for his ridiculous exchange with Ben Aflack on Bill Maher. I mean, an actor of really average intelligence and with zero education or knowledge on the matter gets serious traction and support by hurling absurd accusations of bigotry and racism (as if religion were a race!). We see some of that here on BBI where people aren't even willing to acknowledge the most obvisou and indisputable facts of the problem.
Anyway, I'm glad there's people like Sam Harris fighting the good fight. I am afraid, however, we're very clearly losing the war.
Eh...one man's champion is another man's villain. Or in this case, one man's idea of an intellectual is another man's idea of a charlatan.
Sam Harris isn't nearly as good at what he does or intellectual as you guys think he is. Link - ( New Window )
is a natural goal as the receiving country of immigrants and refugees.
They're leaving a place deemed substandard, poor or dangerous, and entering this country with hopes of a better life and safety.
I don't think it's asking too much to have the immigrants expect to learn the native language, standard for the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, respect the traditions and laws of their new country.
these should be requirements for entry/asylum IMO.
It doesn't mean you have to lose any identification with your homeland or heritage, be proud of it if you are, but there is a reason people come here.
the people who come here and hate America are the dangerous ones and the ones who impede progress. and some of them are the ones who sap the resources from the more deserving.
a horrible misrepresentation about Sam's points and absolutely packed with lies.
I suggest you listen to the actual discussion between them and judge for yourself.
Link - ( New Window )
I've listened to it; hence, my posting that article. And I understand why you think it was such a great discussion by Sam Harris based on your posting habits.
These discussions are always about two opposing views with both sides trying to out-wit or out-shout the other sides. And this discussion/thread is no different. Reactionaries versus apologists...rinse and repeat. It gets tiresome.
is a natural goal as the receiving country of immigrants and refugees.
They're leaving a place deemed substandard, poor or dangerous, and entering this country with hopes of a better life and safety.
I don't think it's asking too much to have the immigrants expect to learn the native language, standard for the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, respect the traditions and laws of their new country.
these should be requirements for entry/asylum IMO.
It doesn't mean you have to lose any identification with your homeland or heritage, be proud of it if you are, but there is a reason people come here.
the people who come here and hate America are the dangerous ones and the ones who impede progress. and some of them are the ones who sap the resources from the more deserving.
standard s/b stand
RE: RE: RE: Immigrant families lose their native identification
Unfortunately it absolutely IS the religion that is the problem and we will one day end up with a true Muslim ban. You will see one of the European countries do it first because their situation will become more dire before ours does.
My guess is that it's not JUST the religion that's the problem. You're probably less likely to see a Muslim who leads a normal day-to-day life in a Western country going all Jihad than you are if, say, they lost a bunch of family members to a stray bomb, or if they attended the public beheading of a loved one.
I don't think there's anything inherent in the religion that will corrupt your average bloke, but it does seem to be an amplifying component when blended with other factors.
on the debate as well as an alternative. Link - ( New Window )
And honestly, I don't really care much of Omer Aziz. However, those, who make Sam Harris out to be this intellectual sage aren't really interested in a nuanced approach to difficult topics as much as they are just interested in confirming their own views. If there's a landlord for an echo chamber, Sam Harris is that guy.
RE: Generally I think the pressure to assimilate is greater now
You have fewer enclaves of immigrants where you can get by with no assimilation. 120 years ago a Jew getting off the boat at Ellis Island could go to a neighborhood where a critical mass of people spoke yiddish. You rented an apartment from someone who spoke the language, and didnt have to deal with a power company, a cable company, a cell phone company, big box stores etc, where it's largely English only (or +Spanish maybe). There was a yiddish newspaper. You had no designs on a job outside the neighborhood -- you were going to be a vendor, clerk, etc. for a yiddish speaker. The customers you dealt with were going to be yiddish speakers.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
I think you need to get out more. There are enclaves and people can get almost everything in their own language and get their foods and other stuff that they had back home. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it can lessen the impetus to assimilation.
RE: It's overly simplistic to say that assimilation was just an easy thing
for any Europeans. By 19th/early 20th century standards, for example, most Italians weren't considered to be truly white Europeans. In fact, I have a copy of my great-grandmother's naturalization certificate from the '30s. Under "race", it says Northern Italian. There's no country of North Italy. It was a distinction drawn because, by the beliefs of the time, there was a tangible racial difference between an immigrant from, say, Piemonte or Liguria and one from Sicily or Calabria. My grandfather has mentioned the same thing to me - his father was very insistent on the superiority of northern Italians. Today we see that as ridiculous, but it was a very real distinction at the time.
To be fair, that came from Italy where the northern areas looked down on Southern Italians, who they didn't even consider Italian.
RE: RE: Generally I think the pressure to assimilate is greater now
You have fewer enclaves of immigrants where you can get by with no assimilation. 120 years ago a Jew getting off the boat at Ellis Island could go to a neighborhood where a critical mass of people spoke yiddish. You rented an apartment from someone who spoke the language, and didnt have to deal with a power company, a cable company, a cell phone company, big box stores etc, where it's largely English only (or +Spanish maybe). There was a yiddish newspaper. You had no designs on a job outside the neighborhood -- you were going to be a vendor, clerk, etc. for a yiddish speaker. The customers you dealt with were going to be yiddish speakers.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
I think you need to get out more. There are enclaves and people can get almost everything in their own language and get their foods and other stuff that they had back home. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it can lessen the impetus to assimilation.
I get out plenty, thanks.
My point is that it is harder to do that compared to 120 years ago. Because you need more contact with large, standardized corporations (cable cos etc.).
is a natural goal as the receiving country of immigrants and refugees.
They're leaving a place deemed substandard, poor or dangerous, and entering this country with hopes of a better life and safety.
I don't think it's asking too much to have the immigrants expect to learn the native language, standard for the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, respect the traditions and laws of their new country.
these should be requirements for entry/asylum IMO.
It doesn't mean you have to lose any identification with your homeland or heritage, be proud of it if you are, but there is a reason people come here.
the people who come here and hate America are the dangerous ones and the ones who impede progress. and some of them are the ones who sap the resources from the more deserving.
standard s/b stand
Ultimately I think this is right. America is not a parcel of land inviting all who want to set up a tent to live here. To the extent we admit non-asylum/refugee immigrants, part and parcel of that invitation is that you participate in our civil society. Does that mean 100% conformity? No, that's impossible and in any event there is no one standard for what an American is. But what it does mean is that you shouldnt live a life separate from the country. Being an American should mean something more than literally being here.
pretending like you don't speak or understand English. The vast majority of immigrants assimilate because it's necessary to work and live. That doesn't mean they don't speak a different language at home or in the community.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Immigrant families lose their native identification
My guess is that it's not JUST the religion that's the problem. You're probably less likely to see a Muslim who leads a normal day-to-day life in a Western country going all Jihad than you are if, say, they lost a bunch of family members to a stray bomb, or if they attended the public beheading of a loved one.
I don't think there's anything inherent in the religion that will corrupt your average bloke, but it does seem to be an amplifying component when blended with other factors.
Actually...I would argue that your typical non-westernized Muslims prescribe to the life and religious ideals of "enshalla" or "ensha-allah," which means life is as god wills it. This means that while there is a semblance of blood feud, etc. in response to wrongs committed against them, in general, Muslims are not nearly as reactive as they get made out to be by the public solely based on their religion. I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with your second paragraph with even more emphasis that your everyday Muslims are even less reactive to wrong done to them.
I dont have a problem with this just because I dont like who said it. We should say it. ISIS and friend romanticize the suicide bomber. Call him a hero and martyr. There should be voices coming from the other direction.
You're not going to dissuade people from strapping on bomb vests by making available a really compelling white paper.
I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with your second paragraph with even more emphasis that your everyday Muslims are even less reactive to wrong done to them.
Fair enough, but I think it depends upon what is being reacted to. If a person is surrounded by people who perceive slights, injustices and acts of brutality committed against them, if there's strong evidence that many of these perceptions are actually realities, if you've suffered against some of these acts yourself, if you're routinely exposed to a certain set of people who will quote scripture as justification for terrible acts in response, and/or you follow that religion yourself, I see that as a mixture that can more likely lead someone down a murderous path than if you've been raised to belief your religion rejects murderous retribution.
Last night there were Muslim, Christian, Sikh, etc
cab drivers and others coming together to help the victims. Extremism is losing the war.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
RE: Last night there were Muslim, Christian, Sikh, etc
on the debate as well as an alternative. Link - ( New Window )
This is a terrific essay and rebuttal of Omer Aziz's buffoonish, opportunistic criticism of Harris and Nawaz. Aziz is maybe a rung or two above Al Sharpton.
Reading this thread, I think I understand the frustration Sam Harris feels trying to talk reasonably with Aziz.
RE: RE: Last night there were Muslim, Christian, Sikh, etc
cab drivers and others coming together to help the victims. Extremism is losing the war.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
You can call it what you want but extremism is losing the war. The US hasn't had a significant attack since 9/11.
are typically on par, in both length and depth, with vanilla Tweets from concerned but not especially knowledgeable citizens. The Pulse nightclub in Orlando, the Boston Marathon, Fort Hood, San Bernadino...an attack doesn't have to be 9/11 scale to be significant. A self-proclaimed caliphate conquered a country's worth of territory, including major cities, and inspired dozens of terrorist attacks worldwide. I'd like to think extremism is losing too, but it is not losing simply because I wish it was so.
RE: RE: RE: Last night there were Muslim, Christian, Sikh, etc
cab drivers and others coming together to help the victims. Extremism is losing the war.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
You can call it what you want but extremism is losing the war. The US hasn't had a significant attack since 9/11.
If you don't think Fort Hood, San Bernadino and Orlando were significant we have very different definitions of that word.
but I'd like some non-frothing takes on the Islamic insurgency in the Philippines. The ISIS-linked group seems to have taken over a regional capital, Marawi (pop appx 200K). Is this a bridge too far for the group, or is the country sclerotic enough that Duterte might not be able to respond effectively? What role, if any, will we play, in light of Duterte's public posture and his statements about human rights? Link - ( New Window )
a horrible misrepresentation about Sam's points and absolutely packed with lies.
I suggest you listen to the actual discussion between them and judge for yourself.
Link - ( New Window )
I've listened to it; hence, my posting that article. And I understand why you think it was such a great discussion by Sam Harris based on your posting habits.
These discussions are always about two opposing views with both sides trying to out-wit or out-shout the other sides. And this discussion/thread is no different. Reactionaries versus apologists...rinse and repeat. It gets tiresome.
RC - Thanks for the response. What part of Sam Harris' arguments over the influence of religious beliefs (e.g. rewards of martyrdom, promotion of religious supremacy, embracing of jihad prescribed in the Islamic texts over and over) , or any others, do you not agree with ? And what is your evidence ?
Rather than linking articles, etc., maybe you can get into some specifics.
Not sure who you categorize as "reactionaries" ? Does that include people that have looked at texts and actual actions made in the name of those texts for the past 1500 years ?
RE: RE: RE: RE: Last night there were Muslim, Christian, Sikh, etc
cab drivers and others coming together to help the victims. Extremism is losing the war.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
You can call it what you want but extremism is losing the war. The US hasn't had a significant attack since 9/11.
If you don't think Fort Hood, San Bernadino and Orlando were significant we have very different definitions of that word.
Yeah, the Boston Marathon bombing was insignificant, try telling that to his parents.
Or the three other deceased victim's families or the 16+ people who lost limbs or 200 other people injured.
with people giving examples of people acting like decent human beings ?
Who on this thread would have the ignorance to argue it's "all Muslims" ?
The responses are always the same and are terrible platitudes. Why are people more concerned about hurting peoples' feelings over religious beliefs that inspire this mayhem ?
but I'd like some non-frothing takes on the Islamic insurgency in the Philippines. The ISIS-linked group seems to have taken over a regional capital, Marawi (pop appx 200K). Is this a bridge too far for the group, or is the country sclerotic enough that Duterte might not be able to respond effectively? What role, if any, will we play, in light of Duterte's public posture and his statements about human rights? Link - ( New Window )
Former Moro Islamic Liberation Front fighters who probably have a new source of funding. Duterte and his predecessors were never able to defeat them, but they were never establish what they would now call a caliphate. If I remember correctly, they were never able to establish much of a presence on Luzon.
Speaking of sclerosis, I doubt Washington will do more than use this as an excuse for another pissing contest while not addressing the issue. However, I don't think the Philippine military will throw away their weapons and run like the Iraqis did.
Quote:
You need a plane ticket to Detroit, stat. What you've said is exactly 0% applicable to the Muslim community there, and it's sizable.
Exactly! Some people are just reading the wrong shit that is passed around on Facebook I guess. Send him to Detroit like you said. More specifically...Dearborn MI. Just go to youtube and type "Muslim Dearborn" and just watch. Here is one for you... Dearborn MI - ( New Window )
I'd like to see something a little more nuanced. Drive through Palisades Park, NJ sometime. 40% Korean, with signs in Korean on a lot of storefronts. While that might show that assimilation is happening slower or only partially, there hasn't been a suicide bombing to date.
Quote:
as they move from generation to generation. My nephews grew up in California and they don't identify as Italian at all. And they are Italian on both sides--third and fourth generation.
A study showed young Jews living out West do not really have any identification with Israel. That was unheard of when I was growing up in Brooklyn.
NY is such an immigrant city that people don't realize the rest of the country is not like that. The next generation of Muslims will not have a strong identification with religion. They will think of themselves as Americans first and foremost.
Persecuting them or singling them out is the best way to get them NOT to identify as Americans and become a diaspora, holding onto to religious instead of a national identity.
Best way to defeat terrorism longterm is to treat the causes not the symptoms.
While that certainly is more the case here than in Europe, you are not getting the same degree of assimilation as in generations past. The ease of travel back to their country of origin as well as some segments of society advocating that they NOT assimilate, that assimilation is cultural fascism (hyperbole conceded) and the ability to function in this country without speaking English makes things different than before.
Eh, I had family who lived in this country for 50+ years and never learned 50 words of English. In modern society, with all of the common media that bind us together and reduced prejudice/exclusiveness etc., I think 2nd generation assimilation is likely more robust than it was 100 years ago. It's just that current problems seem bigger than problems that you cant remember. Much like people who feel like the world is more dangerous and out of control, when it is safer than it has ever been.
Of course there is an argument to be made that our tradition of assimilation was always overstated, that immigrants often returned to their countries of origin, that pockets of native language enclaves persisted for decades after arrival going as far back as the early Nineteenth Century.
But on the balance, the pressures to assimilate aren't necessarily what they were at earlier points in our history, it's not necessarily a safe assumption that the present and future will resemble the past.
Quote:
In case anyone's interested, Sam Harris has a well reasoned and intelligent take on the matter of radical islam. His podcast is called Waking Up, on iTunes or google it.
Sam Harris does an excellent job on this topic.
It just stuns and dismays me how reasoned discourse is almost completely absent from this incredibly serious global problem. Harris is probably most famous in this matter for his ridiculous exchange with Ben Aflack on Bill Maher. I mean, an actor of really average intelligence and with zero education or knowledge on the matter gets serious traction and support by hurling absurd accusations of bigotry and racism (as if religion were a race!). We see some of that here on BBI where people aren't even willing to acknowledge the most obvisou and indisputable facts of the problem.
Anyway, I'm glad there's people like Sam Harris fighting the good fight. I am afraid, however, we're very clearly losing the war.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
Muslims cant do that. In particular, an observant Muslim has to eat halal food. If you grew up in a country where halal food predominated, it's no problem there. Here it is hard. Same thing I see with orthodox jews. Either you go to their restaurants, or you cant break bread with them. They cant go to the neighbors for dinner. Etc.
And then you have the prejudice and fear of course. It's an issue that cant be ignored on the assimilation question. It makes it harder.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
You now get ballots in 6-8 languages. Your cable company offers stations in a multitude of languages. You don't have to watch American television (which may not be a bad thing). Most hospitals now have the ability to deal with many different languages (a good thing). And 150 years ago once you were over here you were generally here to stay, with contact with the old country being letters (at best) as opposed to a cellular phone contract with low rates to the place you left.
Muslims cant do that. In particular, an observant Muslim has to eat halal food. If you grew up in a country where halal food predominated, it's no problem there. Here it is hard. Same thing I see with orthodox jews. Either you go to their restaurants, or you cant break bread with them. They cant go to the neighbors for dinner. Etc.
And then you have the prejudice and fear of course. It's an issue that cant be ignored on the assimilation question. It makes it harder.
The religious difference is undoubtedly important (as with Judaism though there are umpteen Muslims of varying degrees of piety for whom these dietary prohibitions are honored in whole, in part or not at all). There are also simply the social and religious pressures against conformity. Social pressures against conformity existed in varying degrees and forms for all immigrants, but the promise of some sort of divine retribution for assimilation is rather unique.
Quote:
You have fewer enclaves of immigrants where you can get by with no assimilation. 120 years ago a Jew getting off the boat at Ellis Island could go to a neighborhood where a critical mass of people spoke yiddish. You rented an apartment from someone who spoke the language, and didnt have to deal with a power company, a cable company, a cell phone company, big box stores etc, where it's largely English only (or +Spanish maybe). There was a yiddish newspaper. You had no designs on a job outside the neighborhood -- you were going to be a vendor, clerk, etc. for a yiddish speaker. The customers you dealt with were going to be yiddish speakers.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
You now get ballots in 6-8 languages. Your cable company offers stations in a multitude of languages. You don't have to watch American television (which may not be a bad thing). Most hospitals now have the ability to deal with many different languages (a good thing). And 150 years ago once you were over here you were generally here to stay, with contact with the old country being letters (at best) as opposed to a cellular phone contract with low rates to the place you left.
Yes, you can list things. Now wrap them up into an analysis. 120 years ago you could read the Forward (yiddish newspaper). Doctors didnt do much, you couldnt afford them, and it's likely there was some jewish doctor in the neighborhood (even if not US trained).
Im not saying that the balance is totally on once side here. But I think pretending that back then you were forced to assimilate and now there is no pressure I think is just wrong. I've laid out my point.
Quote:
In comment 13479260 jcn56 said:
Quote:
You need a plane ticket to Detroit, stat. What you've said is exactly 0% applicable to the Muslim community there, and it's sizable.
Exactly! Some people are just reading the wrong shit that is passed around on Facebook I guess. Send him to Detroit like you said. More specifically...Dearborn MI. Just go to youtube and type "Muslim Dearborn" and just watch. Here is one for you... Dearborn MI - ( New Window )
I'd like to see something a little more nuanced. Drive through Palisades Park, NJ sometime. 40% Korean, with signs in Korean on a lot of storefronts. While that might show that assimilation is happening slower or only partially, there hasn't been a suicide bombing to date.
Koreans don't worship a God that wants them to kill non-Koreans, and base a large part of their religion(s) on emulating a violent and intolerant warlord.
You have to address the beliefs in the orthodoxy and the authority it gives its practitioners. Koreans will assimilate, like most others, because their religious convictions are not in conflict with those of our societies.
And there are no "reformed" Muslims per se. At least according to the orthodoxy. There are "bad" Muslims and apostates only, depending on their lack of practice or having left the religion. Yes, of course there are millions of Muslims that have attenuated their convictions based on cultural exposure to more universal human rights, and chosen to ignore much of what is in the religious texts.
But this is a hundreds of millions of people problem, once you widen the religious-based beliefs from martyrdom, down through jihad, to more common problems of jew and non-Muslim hatred and religious supremacy, women's rights, gay rights, child marriage and FGM (in some cultures), honor-killing, etc.
It takes serious religious beliefs to make people treat each other so inhumanely. And it's time to have adult conversations about the core texts inspiring and validating them. And to stop treating people as victims all the time (which of course many of them are, of their own co-religionists, but not from "Islamophobia).
People have failed to assimilate for generations upon generations. The root cause of the problem is the essential values of islam, mostly the primacy of its theocracy over the secular rule of law, are fundementally in opposition to the precepts of Western modernity. Sorry if this offends Ben Aflack, but it's clearly the conclusion to which any reasonable person examining the facts will arrive.
Yeah, walk thru Williamsburg and you see signs in Hebrew. Walk thru Chinatown and you see signs in Chinese. Lower East Side (no longer super jewish), Williamsburg, and Chinatown all have populations equal/bigger than Dearborn.
Yeah that may be true for some current immigrants but I wouldnt paint with too broad a brush. I would be interested in seeing polling on comparative attitudes among immigrant populations.
in England you can be 3rd Generation Bangladeshi ( originally Immigrating because Indian used to be a British Colony ) and NEVER ever be accepted as British.
If you are from Morocco decent and your family has lived in France for 60 years
you still will NEVER be considered French -- the racism and exclusion permeates these societies.
In US you don't have radicalization like you do in Europe because it doesn't matter where you come from .. as soon as you get your Passport you are considered as American as someone whose family came over in the Mayflower.
Quote:
Store signs in Arabic and Middle Eastern restaurants are threatening? I don't think so. Hence my request for nuance and comparison to Palisades Park.
Yeah, walk thru Williamsburg and you see signs in Hebrew. Walk thru Chinatown and you see signs in Chinese. Lower East Side (no longer super jewish), Williamsburg, and Chinatown all have populations equal/bigger than Dearborn.
Hell, what about restaurant signs in French, Italian and Spanish?
Quote:
In comment 13479175 trueblueinpw said:
Quote:
In case anyone's interested, Sam Harris has a well reasoned and intelligent take on the matter of radical islam. His podcast is called Waking Up, on iTunes or google it.
Sam Harris does an excellent job on this topic.
It just stuns and dismays me how reasoned discourse is almost completely absent from this incredibly serious global problem. Harris is probably most famous in this matter for his ridiculous exchange with Ben Aflack on Bill Maher. I mean, an actor of really average intelligence and with zero education or knowledge on the matter gets serious traction and support by hurling absurd accusations of bigotry and racism (as if religion were a race!). We see some of that here on BBI where people aren't even willing to acknowledge the most obvisou and indisputable facts of the problem.
Anyway, I'm glad there's people like Sam Harris fighting the good fight. I am afraid, however, we're very clearly losing the war.
Eh...one man's champion is another man's villain. Or in this case, one man's idea of an intellectual is another man's idea of a charlatan.
Sam Harris isn't nearly as good at what he does or intellectual as you guys think he is.
Link - ( New Window )
I suggest you listen to the actual discussion between them and judge for yourself.
Link - ( New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
They're leaving a place deemed substandard, poor or dangerous, and entering this country with hopes of a better life and safety.
I don't think it's asking too much to have the immigrants expect to learn the native language, standard for the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, respect the traditions and laws of their new country.
these should be requirements for entry/asylum IMO.
It doesn't mean you have to lose any identification with your homeland or heritage, be proud of it if you are, but there is a reason people come here.
the people who come here and hate America are the dangerous ones and the ones who impede progress. and some of them are the ones who sap the resources from the more deserving.
I suggest you listen to the actual discussion between them and judge for yourself.
Link - ( New Window )
I've listened to it; hence, my posting that article. And I understand why you think it was such a great discussion by Sam Harris based on your posting habits.
These discussions are always about two opposing views with both sides trying to out-wit or out-shout the other sides. And this discussion/thread is no different. Reactionaries versus apologists...rinse and repeat. It gets tiresome.
They're leaving a place deemed substandard, poor or dangerous, and entering this country with hopes of a better life and safety.
I don't think it's asking too much to have the immigrants expect to learn the native language, standard for the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, respect the traditions and laws of their new country.
these should be requirements for entry/asylum IMO.
It doesn't mean you have to lose any identification with your homeland or heritage, be proud of it if you are, but there is a reason people come here.
the people who come here and hate America are the dangerous ones and the ones who impede progress. and some of them are the ones who sap the resources from the more deserving.
standard s/b stand
Unfortunately it absolutely IS the religion that is the problem and we will one day end up with a true Muslim ban. You will see one of the European countries do it first because their situation will become more dire before ours does.
My guess is that it's not JUST the religion that's the problem. You're probably less likely to see a Muslim who leads a normal day-to-day life in a Western country going all Jihad than you are if, say, they lost a bunch of family members to a stray bomb, or if they attended the public beheading of a loved one.
I don't think there's anything inherent in the religion that will corrupt your average bloke, but it does seem to be an amplifying component when blended with other factors.
Quote:
this is getting way to common and it's only going to get worse if we don't wake up.
I don't believe the data supports that claim
Fuck off asshole.
And honestly, I don't really care much of Omer Aziz. However, those, who make Sam Harris out to be this intellectual sage aren't really interested in a nuanced approach to difficult topics as much as they are just interested in confirming their own views. If there's a landlord for an echo chamber, Sam Harris is that guy.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
I think you need to get out more. There are enclaves and people can get almost everything in their own language and get their foods and other stuff that they had back home. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it can lessen the impetus to assimilation.
To be fair, that came from Italy where the northern areas looked down on Southern Italians, who they didn't even consider Italian.
Quote:
You have fewer enclaves of immigrants where you can get by with no assimilation. 120 years ago a Jew getting off the boat at Ellis Island could go to a neighborhood where a critical mass of people spoke yiddish. You rented an apartment from someone who spoke the language, and didnt have to deal with a power company, a cable company, a cell phone company, big box stores etc, where it's largely English only (or +Spanish maybe). There was a yiddish newspaper. You had no designs on a job outside the neighborhood -- you were going to be a vendor, clerk, etc. for a yiddish speaker. The customers you dealt with were going to be yiddish speakers.
In 2017, not speaking the language is much more limiting, and once you know English, some assimilation (by exposure) is much more likely. It's basically impossible to just deal with businesses where your language is spoken (ex. Spanish). It's a lot harder to count on a life where you could work for 50 years within an enclaves of people just like you.
I think you need to get out more. There are enclaves and people can get almost everything in their own language and get their foods and other stuff that they had back home. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it can lessen the impetus to assimilation.
I get out plenty, thanks.
My point is that it is harder to do that compared to 120 years ago. Because you need more contact with large, standardized corporations (cable cos etc.).
Quote:
is a natural goal as the receiving country of immigrants and refugees.
They're leaving a place deemed substandard, poor or dangerous, and entering this country with hopes of a better life and safety.
I don't think it's asking too much to have the immigrants expect to learn the native language, standard for the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, respect the traditions and laws of their new country.
these should be requirements for entry/asylum IMO.
It doesn't mean you have to lose any identification with your homeland or heritage, be proud of it if you are, but there is a reason people come here.
the people who come here and hate America are the dangerous ones and the ones who impede progress. and some of them are the ones who sap the resources from the more deserving.
standard s/b stand
Ultimately I think this is right. America is not a parcel of land inviting all who want to set up a tent to live here. To the extent we admit non-asylum/refugee immigrants, part and parcel of that invitation is that you participate in our civil society. Does that mean 100% conformity? No, that's impossible and in any event there is no one standard for what an American is. But what it does mean is that you shouldnt live a life separate from the country. Being an American should mean something more than literally being here.
I don't think there's anything inherent in the religion that will corrupt your average bloke, but it does seem to be an amplifying component when blended with other factors.
Actually...I would argue that your typical non-westernized Muslims prescribe to the life and religious ideals of "enshalla" or "ensha-allah," which means life is as god wills it. This means that while there is a semblance of blood feud, etc. in response to wrongs committed against them, in general, Muslims are not nearly as reactive as they get made out to be by the public solely based on their religion. I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with your second paragraph with even more emphasis that your everyday Muslims are even less reactive to wrong done to them.
I dont have a problem with this just because I dont like who said it. We should say it. ISIS and friend romanticize the suicide bomber. Call him a hero and martyr. There should be voices coming from the other direction.
You're not going to dissuade people from strapping on bomb vests by making available a really compelling white paper.
Fair enough, but I think it depends upon what is being reacted to. If a person is surrounded by people who perceive slights, injustices and acts of brutality committed against them, if there's strong evidence that many of these perceptions are actually realities, if you've suffered against some of these acts yourself, if you're routinely exposed to a certain set of people who will quote scripture as justification for terrible acts in response, and/or you follow that religion yourself, I see that as a mixture that can more likely lead someone down a murderous path than if you've been raised to belief your religion rejects murderous retribution.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
What in the world??
This is a terrific essay and rebuttal of Omer Aziz's buffoonish, opportunistic criticism of Harris and Nawaz. Aziz is maybe a rung or two above Al Sharpton.
Reading this thread, I think I understand the frustration Sam Harris feels trying to talk reasonably with Aziz.
Quote:
cab drivers and others coming together to help the victims. Extremism is losing the war.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
You can call it what you want but extremism is losing the war. The US hasn't had a significant attack since 9/11.
Quote:
In comment 13479678 Ron Johnson 30 said:
Quote:
cab drivers and others coming together to help the victims. Extremism is losing the war.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
You can call it what you want but extremism is losing the war. The US hasn't had a significant attack since 9/11.
If you don't think Fort Hood, San Bernadino and Orlando were significant we have very different definitions of that word.
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
a horrible misrepresentation about Sam's points and absolutely packed with lies.
I suggest you listen to the actual discussion between them and judge for yourself.
Link - ( New Window )
I've listened to it; hence, my posting that article. And I understand why you think it was such a great discussion by Sam Harris based on your posting habits.
These discussions are always about two opposing views with both sides trying to out-wit or out-shout the other sides. And this discussion/thread is no different. Reactionaries versus apologists...rinse and repeat. It gets tiresome.
RC - Thanks for the response. What part of Sam Harris' arguments over the influence of religious beliefs (e.g. rewards of martyrdom, promotion of religious supremacy, embracing of jihad prescribed in the Islamic texts over and over) , or any others, do you not agree with ? And what is your evidence ?
Rather than linking articles, etc., maybe you can get into some specifics.
Not sure who you categorize as "reactionaries" ? Does that include people that have looked at texts and actual actions made in the name of those texts for the past 1500 years ?
Quote:
In comment 13479715 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
In comment 13479678 Ron Johnson 30 said:
Quote:
cab drivers and others coming together to help the victims. Extremism is losing the war.
That's a platitude. Extremism is perpetrating several high-profile attacks each year, and the reaction to it is reshaping the political landscape in numerous Western countries.
You can call it what you want but extremism is losing the war. The US hasn't had a significant attack since 9/11.
If you don't think Fort Hood, San Bernadino and Orlando were significant we have very different definitions of that word.
Yeah, the Boston Marathon bombing was insignificant, try telling that to his parents.
Or the three other deceased victim's families or the 16+ people who lost limbs or 200 other people injured.
chalk up a loss for extremism.
Some of you are morons.
Who on this thread would have the ignorance to argue it's "all Muslims" ?
The responses are always the same and are terrible platitudes. Why are people more concerned about hurting peoples' feelings over religious beliefs that inspire this mayhem ?
Former Moro Islamic Liberation Front fighters who probably have a new source of funding. Duterte and his predecessors were never able to defeat them, but they were never establish what they would now call a caliphate. If I remember correctly, they were never able to establish much of a presence on Luzon.
Speaking of sclerosis, I doubt Washington will do more than use this as an excuse for another pissing contest while not addressing the issue. However, I don't think the Philippine military will throw away their weapons and run like the Iraqis did.