I don't oppose immigration of any group of people or other. I have, however, noted that adding yet another intolerant monotheism (Islam) to cultures already torn apart by the other two intolerant monotheisms (Judaism and Christianity -- in fact, there's no such thing as a tolerant monotheism) makes being a gay man such as myself even more difficult. You're probably recalling this essay: https://rhyd.substack.com/p/homonationalism where I write:
"Monotheism isn’t really renowned for its acceptance of same sex desire, and this is putting it quite politely. The tolerance that European and Anglo/American Christian societies currently show fags like me is quite tentative and fragile. Adding in yet another monotheism — whose sacred documents and teachers happily consign homosexuals to death and eternal flames — doesn’t really make the situation that much easier."
Conflating the abrahamic religions ignores thee fact that Christianity was unique in it's dogma and intolerance, something that was more to do with it's relation to Roman jurisprudence then the teachings of Jesus... Contemporary homophobia in islam is defined by colonialism and the influence of fundamentalist Christianity due to missionary work during this period, otherwise, historically Islam has always been more tolerant of same sex relations. A close reading of contemporary Islamic history shows very clearly how - like in African countries, the shift towards homophobia is directly related to Western colonial and neo colonial politics... Maybe you could take a leaf from Judith Butler and instead support the queer Muslim groups that are active in Europe rather than aligning yourself with the war on terror...?
A similar argument has been made for the other two monotheisms (that inherently they are tolerant but some outside force shaped them towards intolerance), and these arguments are all based on the same flawed premise.
Once you decide there is only one god and all other gods are false, the end result will be that all other value systems and associated lifeways will become intolerable.
I stopped believing in God when I was ten but then stopped being an atheist at twenty... But I'm not into exclusionary politics that ignores history. There are articulations of all the monotheistic religions that are non exclusionary and these are the articulations I defend, I will never defend the vicious circle of identitarian politics that seek to tar entire communities because of particular ideological formulations that are always tied to political power. That includes this weird homonationalism, pagan or not, that simply repeats the cry of the Christian crusades in the name of secular modernity as much as it includes the Salafi Islam that the West, along with Saudi Arabia, weaponised as the hope of socialism was slowly extinguished in Islamic countries during the neo colonial era...
I have no admiration for secular modernity, either. And at least we agree somewhere, being that that the ascendancy of the most violent fundamentalisms in Islam (as with Christianity and Judaism) has been helped along by anti-communist interference (to whose current iterations, unfortunately, Judith Butler is currently a handmaiden)...
Yeah, good luck understanding the world without Foucault... I personally can't wait for the return of Stalinism... Lol... Or maybe be honest in where the intolerance of identity politics really has it's origins.
Oh look, again. "Christianity is the work of the Devil and must be destroyed, yet the deranged delusions of a warring prophet are perfectly fine".
I don't know if that's what you actually mean but since we're talking in Strawman language...
Because trying to weigh Semitic Monotheistic religions on a scale of inherent tolerance and humanism is like trying to pick out a single good empire throughout history. We're talking about natural hazards, as Rhyd points out.
Iran hasn't ever been colonised by any Christian state, and it didn't require so in order to persecute and hang gays like it wasn't the 20th Century (I'm referring to when the current legal framework came into place).
And I suppose the Christians (and other religions, such as in Africa now that you mention it) that suffer oppression and violence in Muslim majority areas had it coming.
You see I'm a Spaniard who at some point, like many leftists here, came to believe that Al Andalus wasn't only the best thing that ever happened to the Iberian peninsula (regardless of technological innovations and cultural achievements), but that Islam is inherently better to our oppressive Catholic church. But then, going down that path you, well... end up reading the Qur'an and Hadiths. And that's all one needs, really, to remember why one doesn't follow a Monotheistic Biblical religion in the first place.
I actually base my argument on people I know... Queer Muslims and migrants I've passed time with in collectives in Europe and working with asylum seekers... They all adhere to their religion without it turning into your war on terror/ new atheist crusade phantasy... Perhaps try and find some friends that aren't white.
I said there are articulations of all monotheistic religions that are non exclusionary. You are, like Rhyd, just still caught up in an either/ or logic of exclusion. Putting words in my mouth and making claims based on you nationality only make your argument look bad.
The distinction between monotheism and polytheism is a perculiarly abrihamic delineation. In Hinduism, for example, both isms have coexisted mostly happily, indeed have blended together. More broadly, attitudes towards homosexuality have varied a lot between different times and places. Equally one can argue persuasively that monotheism was a necessary prerequisite for the development of science. The idea of one universal creator gave rise to the idea there were certain fundamental principles which were intelligible.
Thanks so much for the shout out Rhyd - it means the world!
As for immigration, I appreciate your thoughts. Seems one side or the other is using the people who arrive in different cultures as a bludgeon to endlessly prove a point. Without recognising cause, context and implication from all sides, there will be no way to get clarity.
Writing from the UK, we're more pronounced in our mixed up origin as the US - our whole identity is composite and hardly fragile - but we do need to celebrate, support and award native and guest alike.
I find it extraordinary that people would have such a naive view of the US. Even Hollywood doesn't present an entirely rose tainted view of the country.
As for the protests, it would appear this is less about immigrants per se than about the Trump regime's use of military force to crush dissent. First they come for the illegals...
As to America TM-- try being from New Zealand. Everyone is convinced it is utopian paradise fairyland. Even people who are literally here (tourists, new arrivals) don't want to hear that there are deep societal cracks & metastasising class divides. I think New Zealand functions for the rest of the world as an ideological last bastion of hope. Not to say that there aren't good things, there are-- just that it's a weird feeling to be nationally objectified that way
Conversely I've met so many Australians who are constantly bragging about how perfect their country is. An incredible arrogance built on an illusion. Australia has indeed enjoyed decades of economic growth but it's only because it's piggybacked on the rise of China by supplying it with raw materials.
As for immigration, I appreciate your thoughts. Seems one side or the other is using the people who arrive in different cultures as a bludgeon to endlessly prove a point. Without recognising cause, context and implication from all sides, there will be no way to get clarity.
Writing from the UK, we're more pronounced in our mixed up origin as the US - our whole identity is composite and hardly fragile - but we do need to celebrate, support and award native and guest alike.
Thanks so much for the shout out Rhyd! I am also quite happy you didn't say "no" haha. And thank you for always being willing to share your opinion in the divisive landscape known as the internet, we are all better off for it.
You have written against Muslim migration to Europe before so this doesn't really make sense.
I don't oppose immigration of any group of people or other. I have, however, noted that adding yet another intolerant monotheism (Islam) to cultures already torn apart by the other two intolerant monotheisms (Judaism and Christianity -- in fact, there's no such thing as a tolerant monotheism) makes being a gay man such as myself even more difficult. You're probably recalling this essay: https://rhyd.substack.com/p/homonationalism where I write:
"Monotheism isn’t really renowned for its acceptance of same sex desire, and this is putting it quite politely. The tolerance that European and Anglo/American Christian societies currently show fags like me is quite tentative and fragile. Adding in yet another monotheism — whose sacred documents and teachers happily consign homosexuals to death and eternal flames — doesn’t really make the situation that much easier."
Conflating the abrahamic religions ignores thee fact that Christianity was unique in it's dogma and intolerance, something that was more to do with it's relation to Roman jurisprudence then the teachings of Jesus... Contemporary homophobia in islam is defined by colonialism and the influence of fundamentalist Christianity due to missionary work during this period, otherwise, historically Islam has always been more tolerant of same sex relations. A close reading of contemporary Islamic history shows very clearly how - like in African countries, the shift towards homophobia is directly related to Western colonial and neo colonial politics... Maybe you could take a leaf from Judith Butler and instead support the queer Muslim groups that are active in Europe rather than aligning yourself with the war on terror...?
A similar argument has been made for the other two monotheisms (that inherently they are tolerant but some outside force shaped them towards intolerance), and these arguments are all based on the same flawed premise.
Once you decide there is only one god and all other gods are false, the end result will be that all other value systems and associated lifeways will become intolerable.
I stopped believing in God when I was ten but then stopped being an atheist at twenty... But I'm not into exclusionary politics that ignores history. There are articulations of all the monotheistic religions that are non exclusionary and these are the articulations I defend, I will never defend the vicious circle of identitarian politics that seek to tar entire communities because of particular ideological formulations that are always tied to political power. That includes this weird homonationalism, pagan or not, that simply repeats the cry of the Christian crusades in the name of secular modernity as much as it includes the Salafi Islam that the West, along with Saudi Arabia, weaponised as the hope of socialism was slowly extinguished in Islamic countries during the neo colonial era...
I have no admiration for secular modernity, either. And at least we agree somewhere, being that that the ascendancy of the most violent fundamentalisms in Islam (as with Christianity and Judaism) has been helped along by anti-communist interference (to whose current iterations, unfortunately, Judith Butler is currently a handmaiden)...
Yeah, good luck understanding the world without Foucault... I personally can't wait for the return of Stalinism... Lol... Or maybe be honest in where the intolerance of identity politics really has it's origins.
Oh look, again. "Christianity is the work of the Devil and must be destroyed, yet the deranged delusions of a warring prophet are perfectly fine".
I don't know if that's what you actually mean but since we're talking in Strawman language...
Because trying to weigh Semitic Monotheistic religions on a scale of inherent tolerance and humanism is like trying to pick out a single good empire throughout history. We're talking about natural hazards, as Rhyd points out.
Iran hasn't ever been colonised by any Christian state, and it didn't require so in order to persecute and hang gays like it wasn't the 20th Century (I'm referring to when the current legal framework came into place).
And I suppose the Christians (and other religions, such as in Africa now that you mention it) that suffer oppression and violence in Muslim majority areas had it coming.
You see I'm a Spaniard who at some point, like many leftists here, came to believe that Al Andalus wasn't only the best thing that ever happened to the Iberian peninsula (regardless of technological innovations and cultural achievements), but that Islam is inherently better to our oppressive Catholic church. But then, going down that path you, well... end up reading the Qur'an and Hadiths. And that's all one needs, really, to remember why one doesn't follow a Monotheistic Biblical religion in the first place.
I actually base my argument on people I know... Queer Muslims and migrants I've passed time with in collectives in Europe and working with asylum seekers... They all adhere to their religion without it turning into your war on terror/ new atheist crusade phantasy... Perhaps try and find some friends that aren't white.
I said there are articulations of all monotheistic religions that are non exclusionary. You are, like Rhyd, just still caught up in an either/ or logic of exclusion. Putting words in my mouth and making claims based on you nationality only make your argument look bad.
The distinction between monotheism and polytheism is a perculiarly abrihamic delineation. In Hinduism, for example, both isms have coexisted mostly happily, indeed have blended together. More broadly, attitudes towards homosexuality have varied a lot between different times and places. Equally one can argue persuasively that monotheism was a necessary prerequisite for the development of science. The idea of one universal creator gave rise to the idea there were certain fundamental principles which were intelligible.
Thanks so much for the shout out Rhyd - it means the world!
As for immigration, I appreciate your thoughts. Seems one side or the other is using the people who arrive in different cultures as a bludgeon to endlessly prove a point. Without recognising cause, context and implication from all sides, there will be no way to get clarity.
Writing from the UK, we're more pronounced in our mixed up origin as the US - our whole identity is composite and hardly fragile - but we do need to celebrate, support and award native and guest alike.
I find it extraordinary that people would have such a naive view of the US. Even Hollywood doesn't present an entirely rose tainted view of the country.
As for the protests, it would appear this is less about immigrants per se than about the Trump regime's use of military force to crush dissent. First they come for the illegals...
As to America TM-- try being from New Zealand. Everyone is convinced it is utopian paradise fairyland. Even people who are literally here (tourists, new arrivals) don't want to hear that there are deep societal cracks & metastasising class divides. I think New Zealand functions for the rest of the world as an ideological last bastion of hope. Not to say that there aren't good things, there are-- just that it's a weird feeling to be nationally objectified that way
Conversely I've met so many Australians who are constantly bragging about how perfect their country is. An incredible arrogance built on an illusion. Australia has indeed enjoyed decades of economic growth but it's only because it's piggybacked on the rise of China by supplying it with raw materials.
It's an important, timely reminder about how immigration can be weaponized. Thanks.
Thanks so much for the shout out Rhyd - it means the world!
My poems are here https://open.substack.com/pub/danoneill
As for immigration, I appreciate your thoughts. Seems one side or the other is using the people who arrive in different cultures as a bludgeon to endlessly prove a point. Without recognising cause, context and implication from all sides, there will be no way to get clarity.
Writing from the UK, we're more pronounced in our mixed up origin as the US - our whole identity is composite and hardly fragile - but we do need to celebrate, support and award native and guest alike.
Your last sentence doesn't make sense?
Thanks so much for the shout out Rhyd! I am also quite happy you didn't say "no" haha. And thank you for always being willing to share your opinion in the divisive landscape known as the internet, we are all better off for it.
I bought the Ski Saga book. Thanks for the recommendation and looking forward to reading it!