Is there a major conspiracy behind the left's eagerness

>>19550217
I always wondered too
I think this would be better suited in /pol/ tho

>>19550246
/Pol/ is entirely full of Nazi headcases. /x/ seems to have more open minded users. Plus, I do think this a conspiracy, which I think fits into /x/ kinda.

this is >>>/pol/ territory
but look up the "paradoxical alliance"
they're both agents of the great adversary

Liberals are just accepting of lots of diff ppl. It would go against their values to not be.

>>19550268
>Liberals are just accepting of lots of diff ppl. It would go against their values to not be.

Urm, what about Republicans, Christians, Trump supporters, pro-lifers, Neo-Nazis, libertarians, or just about anyone who isn't liberal but also doesn't happen to be Muslim?

>>19550276
You cannot possibly be this willfully retarded, anon

>>19550257
>open minded users
Pretty sure its called schizophrenia.

>>19550217

white guilt turns into stockholm syndrome

The liberals aren't actually accepting Islam. They are accepting "Muslims" more specifically "Muslim Minorities" in the West. They don't give jack shit about the Muslims in the Middle East. And trust me when I say that Muslims in the Middle East face far more persecutions than they can ever face in West, regardless of gender. The thing that Liberals are seeking is to exploit the needs of minorities. They don't care about Islam, and almost none of their views are in correlation with the religion. What they are interested in, however, are the Muslim minorities in the West. And particularly those people, who feel like they are being oppressed. Just like they are doing with Blacks, and asking to open borders of America. The thing is simple. They want minorities on their side, to prove a "peaceful facade" so that the next day, these minorities walk out on streets and chant the words of Liberals. They are gathering all the minorities. There was an interview of a Muslim Scholar who's also living in either UK or USA. He told in the interview that the LGBT people wanted him to support them in their protest for Muslim minorities. But since it's against Islamic views to support homosexuals, the scholar refused, regardless if the fags were walking on the streets for Muslims. His people, however, didn't, as they felt that they were being oppressed in the West, and found it as a perfect chance of making their voices heard - hence more people to join LGBT protests. But, the next day, the LGBT people called the scholar again, telling him that since we started a protest for you, now YOU must start a protest for US. So the scholar again told them to Fuck off. They are just trying to manipulate and get their hands on every aid they can get.

I just think hating Muslims is completely pointless.

You live in the culture you live in and you should do you best to stand for the values you believe in, but you have no business telling people in the Middle East that wearing Head Scarfs is sexist or anything like that.

And it's especially pointless if you use those differences in culture that you view as regressive to justify and hatch your hatred and repulsion of people. That just causes more problems.

I think that eventually head scarfs will die out in the Middle East and I think that's a good thing, but the only thing WE can do in this situation is to set a good example.

I think our lifestyle is truly attractive and if we're tolerant, this lifestyle will permeate the rest of the world really quickly.

Just look at how dominant American culture is around the world.

People like Hollywood and Beyoncé pretty much where ever you go.
And this didn't happen, because we hated and vilified everyone else who likes different music and worse movies, it happened because the American stuff was attractive. The rest of the world WANTED to see Hollywood movies, because they were good.

And I think everyone will want adopt feminism and stuff eventually, because it's GOOD. Because it works, it gives people more freedom, less fear, more respect, higher chance of finding an occupation that's suits their talents, and so on...

>>19550217
All wayward children secretly wish for the strong hand of discipline.

--------->>/pol/

Get out

>>19550257
>/x/ seems to have more open minded users

like retards who believe in black magic and other retarded shit

File: ztX3mMi.png (329KB, 400x468px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 400x468px

>>19550298
COOL argument 10/10

>>19550370
I'm not advocating hating Muslims. I'm questioning why liberals are so eager to defend Islam and its followers. Not everything has to be either you love something or you hating something. I just don't think it makes sense for liberals to defend a very conservative religion. I'm not saying they should display hate towards it.

Also, the problem isn't Islam in Islamic countries, it's Islam in liberal countries.

>>19550217
This is /x/

>>19550217
>Islam
>hardcore conservatives
Conservatism, as it is commonly understood by those who self identify with that label in the west, is about as far away from anything Islamic as you can get, because it is, fundamentally, a movement of christian or culturally christian peoples.
Which goes a long way to explaining why the left is so enamored with Islam lately, because both muslims and the leftists in the west have common cause in the fight against conservatism.
If you learn what the words you use to construct arguments mean, half of your questions will be answered before you can finish making a thread.
>>>/pol/

File: misfit.png (1MB, 720x1068px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 720x1068px

>>19550217

It's just the gods toying with mortal arrogance. Islam, Judaism, and Christianity assert they represent and are experts on intergalactic superhuman entities - naturally everyone and his dog on Earth is qualified to make judgments and evaluations regarding interactions with intergalactic superhuman entities.

If there were to be such a thing as an intergalactic superhuman entity - it would be reasonable that a mortal would want to walk on proverbial eggshells around it - but these mortals have no problem capitulating to and/or repeating proven lies about hypothetical intergalactic superhuman entities for their personal worldly gain and worldly reputation. They have received their reward in full.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwCaHT0lcVo

Peter Hitchens explains of prettig well

"
When I was a Revolutionary Marxist, we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible.

It wasn't because we liked immigrants, but because we didn't like Britain. We saw immigrants - from anywhere - as allies against the staid, settled, conservative society that our country still was at the end of the Sixties.

Also, we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people - usually in the poorest parts of Britain - who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly 'vibrant communities'.

If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots.

Revolutionary students didn't come from such 'vibrant' areas (we came, as far as I could tell, mostly from Surrey and the nicer parts of London).

We might live in 'vibrant' places for a few (usually squalid) years, amid unmown lawns and overflowing dustbins.

But we did so as irresponsible, childless transients - not as homeowners, or as parents of school-age children, or as old people hoping for a bit of serenity at the ends of their lives.

When we graduated and began to earn serious money, we generally headed for expensive London enclaves and became extremely choosy about where our children went to school, a choice we happily denied the urban poor, the ones we sneered at as 'racists'.

What did we know, or care, of the great silent revolution which even then was beginning to transform the lives of the British poor?

To us, it meant patriotism and tradition could always be derided as 'racist'.

And it also meant cheap servants for the rich new middle-class, for the first time since 1939, as well as cheap restaurants and - later on - cheap builders and plumbers working off the books.

It wasn't our wages that were depressed, or our work that was priced out of the market. Immigrants didn't do the sort of jobs we did.

They were no threat to us."
Cont

>>19550610
The only threat might have come from the aggrieved British people, but we could always stifle their protests by suggesting that they were modern-day fascists.

I have learned since what a spiteful, self-righteous, snobbish and arrogant person I was (and most of my revolutionary comrades were, too).

I have seen places that I knew and felt at home in, changed completely in a few short years.

I have imagined what it might be like to have grown old while stranded in shabby, narrow streets where my neighbours spoke a different language and I gradually found myself becoming a lonely, shaky voiced stranger in a world I once knew, but which no longer knew me.

I have felt deeply, hopelessly sorry that I did and said nothing in defence of those whose lives were turned upside down, without their ever being asked, and who were warned very clearly that, if they complained, they would be despised outcasts.

And I have spent a great deal of time in the parts of Britain where the revolutionary unintelligentsia don't go.

Such people seldom, if ever, visit their own country.

Their orbits are in fashionable London zones, and holiday destinations.

They are better acquainted with the Apennines of Italy than with the Pennines of their own country.

But, unlike me, most of the Sixties generation still hold the views I used to hold and - with the recent, honourable exception of David Goodhart, the Left-wing journalist turned Think Tank boss who recognises he was wrong - they will not change.

>>19550616
was wrong - they will not change.

The worst part of this is the deep, deep hypocrisy of it.

Even back in my Trotskyist days I had begun to notice that many of the migrants from Asia were in fact not our allies.

They were deeply, unshakably religious.

They were socially conservative.

Their attitudes towards girls and women were, in many cases, close to medieval.

Many of them were horribly hostile to Jews, in a way which we would have condemned fiercely if anyone else had expressed it, but which we somehow managed to forgive and forget in their case.

We have recently seen this in the distressing and embarrassing episode of Lord Ahmed's outburst against a phantom Jewish conspiracy.

But I recall ten years ago, in a Muslim bookshop in the backstreets of Burnley, seeing on open display a modern edition of Henry Ford's revolting anti-Jewish diatribe The International Jew, long ago disowned by Ford himself.

It is unthinkable that any mainstream shop in any High Street could sell this toxic tripe.

Many of these new arrivals, though we revolutionaries welcomed them, knew and cared nothing of the great liberal causes we all supported. Or they were hostile to them.

Many on the Left still lie to themselves about this. George Galloway, the most Left-wing MP in Parliament, owes his seat to the support of conservative Muslims.

Yet he voted in favour of same-sex marriage.

It would be interesting to be at any meetings where Mr Galloway discusses this with his constituents.

Of course, all political parties are compromises, but there is a big difference between splitting the difference and flatly ignoring a profound clash of principles.

This sort of cynicism has been at the heart of the deal.

Immigrants have been used by those who wanted to transform the country.

They have taken the parts of them they liked, and made much of them.

They have ignored the parts they did not like.

>>19550621
Full article: http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/04/how-i-am-partly-to-blame-for-mass-immigration.html

>>19550624
That was great, thanks for posting

>>19550276
It's called the paradox of tolerance. You can't be tolerant of intolerance that threatens to undermine tolerance. Muslims are a minority, so their wife-beating and gay-stoning ways aren't a threat. Fundamentalist Christians basically want Christian sharia and have way bigger numbers, so they're a threat.

>>19550370

I don't think this is about muslims in the middle east but muslims in the west. If there were no or miniscule amount of muslims in western European countries leftists/liberals or whatever you want to call it wouldn't give a shit about muslims and islamophobia, the later wouldn't even be a real word. They probably would be the first to criticise Islam.

The thinking goes as follows, if a group of people is a big enough majority to be noticeable in society leftists are no longer willing to talk about the negative impact of said minority as they are afraid if they said the obvious it would create a backlash and the minority, so it's not longer allowed to be criticised.

It's like it's ok for most people to say some person stinks in the literal meaning of the word giving off a bad odor if the stinky person is not present, but once the stinky person is present and in hearing distance you probably don't want to talk about that the person stinks with your friend, unless you want to bully the stinky person and make him or her feel bad, since you still have to deal with the stinky person every day.

On a societal scale this creates suppressed feelings like anger and makes the backlash they are trying to avoid even worse unless you can suppress it long enough where they don't have the means anymore since the majority is now the minority and that's pretty much where we are heading now.

>>19550769

>, if a group of people is a big enough majority

minority

>>19550653
so then tolerance cant exist?

File: IMG_0494.gif (499KB, 450x343px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 450x343px

>>19550217
Maybe an integrated assault on the American people? Maybe brainwashing? I dunno

>>19550653

If I criticise the intolerance and supremacy in Islam against other religions and minorities and arab machismo in general that's not intolerance to me, if anything it goes very much in line of not tolerating the intolerant. And yes even if someone is a minority in my country they could still be a potential viable threat. Revolutions, totalitarian states, ruling classes were always just made up by societal minorities. Muslims are organised in their political religion and feel a bound with each other through that, we are not.

>>19550217
because liberals are retarded
and powered only by hate
they are blind crybabies and traitors

File: I_vonder.png (39KB, 178x186px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 178x186px

>>19550217
The /x/ part of this discussion is that anybody with half a brain can see this obvious cognitive dissonance. It's like some logic killing ray is being shot right into their heads.

The NOT-/x/ part is that part of islam is LYING to non-muslims about the true nature of islam. Muslims purposely PRESENT a very liberal (and false) view of islam to liberals, and they eat it up. Also calling a brown person a fucking liar would be waycist.

Back to /x/ is why can liberals not see that muslims are lying right to their faces? Is this the power of conditioning, or some desert Babylonian monkey paw magic?

>>19550257
>/Pol/ is entirely full of Nazi headcases
>he thinks /pol/ is unironically Nazi
Shame on you

>>19550405
Compared to the typical /pol/tard globalist cuck who believes in the "free" market economy and other sensible shit.

>>19550497
>conservatism is intrinsically tied to Christianity

>>19550928
I've met these affable, assimilated muslims. The first thing they say when asked about their religion is usually some left field apologetic statement like, "Well I've never seen someone beheaded." "I don't have multiple wives and none of my friends do." And my fav: "Islam is a religion of PEACE."

>>19550935
WHOA I just got it, the entire board is satire. Thanks for clearing that up.

>>19550217
Liberals aren't human. They can't be expected to make logical decisions.

ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga. ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga ooga.

>>19550217
>Is there a major conspiracy behind the left's eagerness to defend Islam?
no

muslims aren't a homogenous group

i have muslim friends, who have families, who have more friends, none of whom are in isis
obviously, whatever faction of a group that is the most violent tends to win, which is what has happened for centuries, then again the past century when islamic states were actually secular


there's no brainwashing, there are people out here who are having different experiences than you and have a different frame of reference.
muslims to me aren't some sort of mysterious foreign invader, they're people i know who generally want the same things i do, with some of them being more particular about what they were and how often they pray.

the best thing we could do for muslims is actually commit to a 'cultural war' of sorts and infiltrate their cultures with life affirming, individual affirming media
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNzQjvhKoPk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDkF5eWZg7c

If you want a paranormal explanation......

Islam was created by jews and arab muslims are the perfect tools for jew control, Ironically due to their lower IQ's and Desire for white woman and violence.

The jews intend to flood and miscigenate whites, because they're the only ones who can collectively rise against them.

The jews basically want a global single race of brazillian-arab low iq fucks with no identity, religion, or culture that they can fully control which will enable them to commit mass genocide on the human populace so they can have their 10 million man paradise.


shit pretty much happens every few millenia, nothing new. Crazy supernatural shit is probably gonna go down in the next 60 years.

Then when the next society is built over ashes you'll have snarky ignorant atheist who will believe we were just fucking cavemen.

>>19550217
i see people saying how some muslims arent bad but those people lie to themselves about their religion and ignore the blatant problems with it to a point where you have to wonder why they still follow it.

>>19550976
Yes, but of course, there is always a band of semites trying to appropriate power words for themselves, like the Trotskyite communists who declared themselves neoconservatives, or neocons for short.
These latest semite migrants, the muslims, will also try and appropriate the word for themselves, and there will be some pushback.

>>19550217
Here`s the deal, remember the popular statement "Islam is a religion of peace"`? Well, no Muslim ever invented or uttered such falsehood before George Bush. And why would George Bush tell Muslims what their own religion is? Of course, to keep Muslims from fighting against the "war on terror". If Muslims keep on getting kind treatment from the government, and constantly get told by non-Muslims that their religion is a "religion of peace", the chance for those Muslims to go and live in sharia-controller land decreases. That is the reason why liberal legislatures treat Muslims specially, because they don`t want them to join anti-west groups like the Islamic State or Boko Haram. Evidence for this statement lies in all the fake Muftis and Sheikhs that reside in Muslim land. A great example of a fake Mufti is a man (or michiveous devil) named "Mufti Menk". He keeps on rambling about Islam being a "religion of peace", not FOR the sake of keeping peace, but for the sake of tricking Muslims into thinking their religion is peaceful, and thus one should not supposedly fight western military occupation. In summary, liberals "defend" Islam and Muslims as a strategy that is built upon trickery and lies, so they wont join anti-western military occupation groups, like ISIS or Boko Haram.

Most Liberals are useful idiots, desperate to do whatever they think is the right thing, without ever taking a second to consider the implications of what they do. They're basically junkies, addicted the warm fuzzy feelings they get by "being good".

>>19552850

That's brutal. George Jr. cucked the Muslims.

>>19550497
Conservatism is exactly what the name implies. It's about conserving things. Namely the traditional values of your culture. There's nothing explicitly Christian about conservatism.