Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Whatsthepoint wrote

OK, let's keep it real then.

How does this anarchist non-state, with any permanent infrastructure deal with an international and deeply hostile foreign based movement like ISIS?

For them, it's not about taking your things, it's about throwing gay's off a roof, and executing anyone who doesn't follow their fascist belief system.

Their is nothing hypothetical there. How do you protect against something like that without full time staff, how do you organize such staff and provide oversight and transparency without the creation of an institution, and how do you manage several necessary institutions without some form of governance.


ziq wrote (edited )

You of course realize the people who defeated ISIL in Syria practice Democratic Confederalism; an offshoot of anarchism?

People win wars, not states.

It's actually pretty funny that you're using ISIL as your example. The US created ISIL. Our comrades defeated it.


Whatsthepoint wrote

The US didn't create Isis. The anarchy and lawlessness in Iraq created Isis.

And while the Kurdish did much to fight Isis, are true socialists andbhave some off-the-wall hottest female soldiers that side of the idf... it was Russia and the brutality of Russian special forces that defeated Isis.


ziq wrote (edited )

ISIL is only defeated on the ground, by the communities it terrorizes. Foreign air strikes are useless against ideology.

The US didn't create Isis. The anarchy and lawlessness in Iraq created Isis.

And who the fuck do you think created 'lawlessness' in Iraq by bombing it into rubble and stealing its oil?

Not going to engage you any more. Willful ignorance isn't a good look.


Whatsthepoint wrote

Find out what happened to the spetznas in Chechnya, you will understand why the spetznas have a bee in their bonnet for jihadis.

Russia went in on the ground. They fought hard.

And keep your guardian links, one of the worst propaganda papers there is.

As for your logic.... we don't need force monopoly ensuring the rule of law... your threats are hypothetical....Isis was created by lawlessness


chameleon wrote

And keep your guardian links, one of the worst propaganda papers there is.

"Anything I disagree with is propaganda now" could you make your Trumpism any more obvious


Whatsthepoint wrote

I used to think it was a legitimate source, but read an in depth article long ago about something relating to international affairs that I had intimate knowledge of... it was amazing how they twisted the facts and the narrative into a pro-west point of view. Leaving out several key details and obvious things.


dele_ted OP wrote

Anarchists aren't incapable of defending themselves, and shaping an army when the situation calls for it. The army wouldn't be incompetent, or disorganized, as you seem to think. Leaders (strategics, organizers and so on - not leaders with authority) are welcome in anarchism, as long as the people approve of them and feel that the plans they present is valid.

Ziq's reply sums things up very well, we have the perfect example right now, on this very planet, although they might not last much longer against the huge capitalist armies that's constantly attacking them (Erdogan, primarily) because the fascists know that self-governance means trouble for their positions of power.

On top of all that, it's common knowledge by now that America funded Islamic State. Not because of shifting alliances, as your average mass media might explain, but because it gave them an excuse to invade, destroy and enslave a country that could potentially have been a threat in the near future, since they were giving up on trading oil in the american dollar, refusing the implementation of a central bank, refusing the construction of the pipeline through their country, among other things. While the state is thriving, ordinary citizens everywhere is suffering on their behalf. This is the reality of the monopoly on violence, that you so eagerly want to afford the state.


Whatsthepoint wrote

If an attack comes, it's too late to organise.

The Kurds had their army long before Isis turned up.

I am very aware of the situation in Syria, you left out the part how the Turkish secret service were the people leading the FSA


[deleted] wrote (edited )


Whatsthepoint wrote

OK well first of all thank you for typing up so much about the Wahhabi islamofascist organisation that is Isis.

I will be amazed if anyone here can tell me something about Isis I don't already know.

But I fear the details of Isis, it's funding and support structure, ideological basis, logistics, n number, interactions with the global front for the jihad against the Jew's and crusaders (to give al Qaeda / as nusra it's proper name) and the haqqani network are going a little off topic.

On the topic at hand, you mention

The state force monopoly is there to make people use dialogue.”

this is not true. this monopoly is designed to keep us in line and prevent us from having a way to fight them off. the argument that this is to keep us peaceful and talking rather than barbaric and fighting is propaganda.

Thing is, in order to 'keep us in line and prevent us from having a way to fight them off' a force monopoly is not required. Only a force majore.

A force monopoly, does not even need to be held by the organization that has the greatest force.

Force monopoly means literally that. The state is the only one who can legally sanction the use of force.

If there is not a force monopoly, then it's OK for people, or organisations, to use force as they feel appropriate.

This could lead to some very dangerous situations, socially, practically and politically


[deleted] wrote


Whatsthepoint wrote

Actually, it is very clear that it is YOU who has a bigoted view of Muslims.

You seek to judge and understand another culture and judge it by your own cultural standards. I believe thats called cultural imperialism.

[ISIS] it's made up of delusional people, [...], who require a state force to tell them what to do

The same could be said about the waffen SS, are you going to tell me that they wern't facists too now?

This whole attempt to remove Islam from ISIS, to say that they are simple mercenaries is the height of ignorance. Yes, the fighters were paid (and recieved their cut of the 'spoils', including women as per the Haddith). But the going rate for a mercenary is $1-3000 per day. ISIS "mercenaries" earned less than that a month.

Yes I too have gay muslim friends (avid Quranists who reject the Haddith in it's entirety), but I also know people who grew up in places like Somalia (that country in Africa that has no government) and other Muslim countries. I know many Muslims, and many of them are my friends.

But for YOU to judge, that the version of Islam that fits in nicely with your western liberal values are the "right" Muslims who are correctly interperting the Quran (literal word of god) and the version of Islam that goes against your western values is the "wrong" kind of islam, followed only by the delusional, is as much ignorant as it is offensive.

I have read the quran (not the Haddith, can't be bothered, too many of em, and what I have read is really cunty), have you?

I have had long conversations, often at times getting metaphysical about Islam, with various Muslims of varying degrees of piety and who have a variety of different views with regards to society and Islam.

From gay quranists to Sharia will create a utopia reverts, and many in between.

The primary funding ISIS relied on was the sale of it's oil on the black market, often through Turkey. Yes of Course Saudi Arabia (home of Wahhabism) had a role to play, it is their belief structure ISIS was promoting, after all... "the only thing worse than a Jew is a shia, but not by much" (direct quote I've heard more than once, said with a smile as a 'joke', often with the other person finishing the sentence)

And I'm sure from your position of knowledge, you know all about the conflicts, history, theological differences and political animosity between the Sunni and Shia muslims right?

But no...Muslims are being 'oppressed' so they must be our allies, and there for their goals, values and ideals must align with ours right?

Islam, is a multi-faceted complex religion, it has it's dark parts and issues, and while there is a desire for reform (to a point) there is also a deep cultural resistance to 'religious innovation', that is unlikely to be overcome within Muslim countries anytime soon.

You can't and shouldn't judge someone based on their religion (Islam or otherwise), but to say that the fighters and leaders of ISIS, along with many of the people who are doing fucked up shit like stoning adulterers are not Muslim, or don't believe they are being 'good' Muslims. Is a bit like saying those abortion clinic or westboro protesters don't believe in Jesus, or aren't christian.

In truth you know very little about what you claim to be in a position to judge.

Feel free to prove me wrong, and answer this simple question (that anyone with a basic understanding of Islam can answer for you)

If it says it's ok to drink and gamble in the quran, and even instructs how much its ok to drink and gamble, why do Muslims consider it haram to drink and gamble?


[deleted] wrote


Whatsthepoint wrote

You're getting boring, especially as you keep misreading, or are unable to retain what I say when you post.


you quote on these types of forums using the pointy bracket ">"

2: I have not read the hadith, and did not say I read the hadith. I pretty much said the opposite.

  1. Quranists are a thing (they even have a website) and by the sounds of it you are. One.

Worth noting that according to all streams of Islam (except the questions) you are not a Muslim if you do not accept the hadith. If you are already a Muslim, and you reject the hadith, this is even classed by some as apostasy.

I was amazed, surprised and still do not fully understand why the big hate for Quranists, but loads get killed every year because of it, even in the west.

Keep that one to yourself unless amongst friends.

3: I didn't say I know the correct interpretation of the Quran. It is generally one of the central tenants of the Muslim faith that it is the literal word of god.

  1. You clearly have no idea what an islamofascist is. It means literally the opposite of what you think. It is the pushing, promoting, preaching, of the Islamic faith and Sharia law using fascist methodology. Think Hitler with a beard.

  2. There were many answers to my final question actually. Pity you didn't answer.

  3. I fucking dare you to tell a wahabbi he is not Muslim.


[deleted] wrote


Whatsthepoint wrote

lol, race card - pathetic

There was me thinking that people on this site would.

a. have a basic understanding of what fascism is

b. Be generally against fascism.

You clearly don't.

I would never dream of calling a zionist a jewish fascist, because zionists are not fascists. They are many many things, but they are not fascists.

You can go to Israel, you can say to whomever you like, that Zionism is the height of bullshit, even that the religion of Judaism is nonsense from a by gone age, and thats fine. Hell as I discovered when I went there, you will probably be suprised how many Israeli's actually agree with you #freepalestine

If you want to talk about christian-fascists, you have to go back to either the crusades, or the inquisition, or the day's of burning heretics. In those days if you went against the teachings of the church, you were punished. These days, even the most extreme, mouthbreathing westboro baptist fuckwits aren't fascists. They won't punish you for not being christian.

There are many places in the world where you cannot be critical in anyway of Islam, or of the interpretation of islam that exists locally. There are many in the middle east and more in the west who are concerned about islamofascism, who are muslims. If you genuinely believe that all doctrines are open to fascism but somehow Islam is special and isn't, then you clearly have your head in the sand.

Be really wonderful to hear your opinion about the people sitting in jail for sending a tweet that was deemed un-islamic in KSA.

Or what you would say to the shopkeeper who got stabbed to death, because his quran only interpretation of islam, went against the official hadith included doctrine