Leftists and Muslims

The following article from Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung Die Tageszeitung was translated by “Guest” in our comments.

The translator notes:

This is by a reformist Muslim who does define some of the problems of Islam and who is trying to get support from the Left. This one at least has strong prejudices against AfD and PEGIDA — unjustified, in my opinion. Still, I do think waking more young, Left Germans up to the extremely right-wing truth of Islam is a useful first step.

The translation has been lightly edited for spelling, punctuation, and clarity:

Essay: Leftists and Muslims

by Ahmad Mansour

We Aren’t Your Stuffed Animals

The left-liberal movement has trouble with critical Muslims. It sees itself as protector of conservative Muslims and thus turns them into victims.

The woman wished to remain anonymous when she recently wrote to me; a staff member of a youth service. She was helpless. Her service knew of cases in which violence belongs to a ‘traditional upbringing’ in families with a ‘migrant background’. Small girls and boys had bruises, had been cowed with threats and trained to ‘obedience’. But the staff members at the youth service have to deal with parents and children in a ‘culturally sensitive’ way and not necessarily step in, although it was clearly a legal requirement. Her letter stated “That’s not all right, is it?” as though she wanted an OK from me for something that is as clear as glass in human and legal terms: step in, of course, no matter where someone is from.

What the staff member of the service wrote to me is not unusual. I get hundreds of such letters. Teachers and social workers describe the dilemma they find themselves in: should they consider traditions? Have respect for authoritarian fathers? Care for the honour of girls — and their families — who aren’t allowed to attend swimming lessons? The people writing to me are kind and completely helpless.

Muslims and people with a “migration background” enjoy a special sympathy and solidarity amongst Left progressive people in Germany. They want to stand up against racism and prejudice. I am an Arab myself, originally from Israel, and have lived here since 2004. In my first years in Germany I met many nice people in the left-liberal political wing.

Since I have criticised certain religious content with which I grew up, they aren’t quite so nice any more. Of course their reactions can’t be compared to my ‘internal’ opponents, from whom I receive hate mail. But some people no longer like an Arab such as myself.

I don’t fit the cliché

I don’t fit the cliché of those who only complain about racist prejudices, even though I certainly do that too, but I welcome the democracy in which I live, and I openly and clearly criticise the denominational narrowness of the Muslim communities in this country. I criticise Muslim confederations such as Ditib or the central council of Muslims [Zentralrat der Muslime] who claim to speak in the name of my religion and for all Muslims in Germany, which doesn’t even stack up statistically.

I work for intra-religious and societal reforms and publicly state that much is going wrong in families, schools and society in the way they handle religious fundamentalism and Islamic radicalism.

A network of German Left-liberals and Greens ‘protects’ a majority of Muslims in Germany from the minority of their Muslim critics. What is Left about that, what is progressive? I ask myself. And: are you insane? Or have we become your stuffed animals?

Humanistic criticism of society, and enlightenment have a great tradition in the German-speaking sphere. Enlightenment always, absolutely always, involved criticism of the regime [Herrschaft]. And the regime almost always has to do with masters [Herren], i.e. with men, with patriarchy. The great monotheistic world religions pay homage to a patriarchal, punishing God, one of the strongest power factors of a hierarchical, anti-democratic world view.

“Opium of the Masses”

Marx called religion the “Opium of the Masses”. Hegel, Kant and Weber were critics of religion. Freud analysed one origin of the invention of a strict father God as stemming from an immature need to give responsibility to authority, to submit in a childlike way. The French revolution criticised religion as an instrument of power and oppression. The student revolts of 1968 also involved criticism of the clergy, of the status of women in the church, of religious prohibition of thought, of concepts of authority and the cruel practices in state and church orphanages. Recently the general public has been shocked by the widespread abuse of children in Catholic and other institutions, which became known as of 2010.

Criticism of religion as an instrument of power by believers and non-believers is a classic of the Left! This criticism belongs in the centre of its foundation. Thus it seems crazy when Muslim critics of their own religion are viewed with suspicion by Greens, Leftists and even Social Democrats. Why is our criticism not just as valid?

Beneath a different key signature the Left-Green camp is doing the same as the Salafists, Wahhabists and other Islamic fundamentalists whom we criticise. They want to muzzle critical Muslims. One group silences Muslims in the name of a patriarchal God, the other one because they consider criticism of our religion too offensive: we Muslims are deigned incapable of thinking critically and releasing ourselves from decrepit traditions. But why should that which largely succeeded for other religions through criticism and reformation from within and without — for Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism — not work for Islam? And why don’t we receive solidarity from the progressives in this country?

Burning Problems

Critical Muslims are refused debate in Germany from two sides: from the official Muslim associations and from most Left and Green milieus. This is astonishing, and should be food for thought. In both camps one refuses to clearly name and deal with burning problems in Muslim communities.

Amongst others these problems are: the growth of a dangerous fundamentalism that is drawing ever more young people into the terror state of IS, the exclusion of women as second-class people, raising children through the pedagogy of fear, a hostility towards sexuality (simultaneously highly sexualised and made taboo), and a literalism that doesn’t understand the Koran in its historic and local context but sees it as dictated by Allah. Thousands of examples show how constrained and unhappy the adherence to these concepts makes people.

As long as the Muslim associations — as well as Greens and Left — deny that a traditionally patriarchal understanding of Islam supports fundamentalist Muslims, AfD and Pegida will have their say. The new right claims identification of the problems for itself — and it really does so: in a rabble-rousing and racist way instead of politically enlightening, sociologically clear and analytical criticism of religion.

No Solidarity from AfD

Wise and preventative politics must desire and prompt debate in the middle of society. A traditional understanding of Islam promotes sexual taboos and sexual violence. It has a huge influence on gender interaction. The events of Cologne’s New Year’s Eve have their example in Cairo’s Tahrir square and elsewhere. Young men forced into sexual abstinence by ‘religious tradition’ attack women in public. Observing this is not racist but a fact. We, Muslims, have this problem — the critical ones amongst us name it and need the solidarity of democrats in this country. We don’t want solidarity from AfD or Pegida, because that would be none.

An open debate without taboos will lead to solutions, to reflection and better prevention. And it will weaken the radical right and Islamists. It must also become clear to all that Muslims don’t want to be cast as ‘victims’ but want to be citizens with equal rights and duties.

There are many of us critical Muslims. More than you think. In April 2015 I helped found the Muslim Forum Germany [Muslimische Forum Deutschland] in Berlin. We fight for a humanistic Islam, for a debate within the Muslim community. We are journalists, Islam scholars, sociologists, psychologists, and students. And we are all part of this society. Dare to listen to us and discuss with us!

53 thoughts on “Leftists and Muslims

  1. We are journalists, Islam scholars, sociologists, psychologists, and students.

    It would have helped if he could have named at least one group of people that I respect.

    • Yes, I thought that too – just chattering classes. But German TV has several talk shows such as Maischberger and Fakt Ist. If people like Mansour could speak up on these against fundamentalist Muslims it would be good: so far I’ve mainly seen deniers such as Lamya Kaddor shouting down AfD members for daring to ‘generalise’ when they name the problems that Mansour does at least clearly name here.

  2. Women are equal in the eyes of God. “All are equal before the law”. These impositions of inequality upon society are human in origin. True freedom and liberty is about being made and acting in the Image and way of God. This latter is important/ “Imago” in Latin means far more than simply a esoteric “Selfie”.an idealized mental image of another person or the self. It refers to the genius or driving “spirit” of the Being.

    We have a free conscience and free will. Aquinas states that “God is a Singularity outside of space and time” that may “on occasion intervene in an act of grace to prevent a catastrophe or event that threatens Creation”….In other words like HIm we can choose not to act or to do so.

    Jesus talked about fulfilling the Law not destroying it. We have an absolute duty to act well and love one another. The same Law applies to all sexes. We can submit to God’s Will by acting according to thise tenets of Free will and responsibility. It is not a Churche’s task to define what a Man or Woman can do or not. Neither should it abuse power. What it should be doing is to study and analyse the above.At best the Church can guide but the responsibility is with the individual, not some external ideology or thought policeman whoever or whatever it is.

    • And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

      Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

      …And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

      Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

      But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

      • Are you arguing for this horrible, patronising, paternalistic view of women, ok, or are you being ironic? If the former, you should try fundamentalist Islam- should be right up your street.

        • [S?]he’s trying Christianity, Mark H. Many men who try it seem to be very sweetly protective of their plump cheerful wives, and many women who try it seem to be very sweetly supportive of their chunky affable husbands, and these nice couples have lots of kids who play baseball or join the school choir and stuff like that and rarely shoot cops or blow people up at races.

        • The quotes were taken a bit out of context. The sum of it is that for the husband, he is to give himself to his wife as Jesus gave Himself for the Church, (Calvary anyone?). Just as Jesus gave His life to redeem mankind, we men are to give of ourselves to our wives to cherish and nurture them, (hey, we don’t have to endure the travail of childbirth!) and provide an example to our children (and grandchildren) for them to follow when they come of age.
          As for the last quote, that was addressed to the Corinthian Church and was a discussion regarding local customs that had the Temple prostitutes walking around bare-headed with shaven heads. Those who had left that lifestyle and joined the Church had asked for instructions on decorum. Paul had to spell it out to the Corinthians and it took him two lengthy epistles to do so.
          Finally, Peter admonishes us guys by exhorting us to regard the wife as the weaker vessel and care for her lest our prayers be hindered. Dymphna can tell you what the pregnancy/childbirth cycle can do to a woman’s body and her metabolism. I have watched what has occurred to my wife and two daughters. Tain’t pretty dude, that’s why we are to give ourselves in caring for them. That’s what the Gospel is all about. You can give of yourself and regard (love) others more than yourself because Jesus has taken care of sin and death and provided you a place in heaven so that you don’t need to sweat the small stuff anymore. Cool deal, no?

          • I chose to quote directly from the Bible because I don’t think the Bible says “women are equal to men” – as Bishop Cardinal Guy Leven seems to have argued above. I would argue that men and women are different. The roles of men and women are different, and therefore not equal. And I don’t think that’s too much of a BS after all – women are phisically weaker, fit more for household duties than for combat or construction works. I don’t mean no disrespect but that’s the way it is. What I don’t agree with is saying it is not so – because I just saw Angelina Jolie kill 15 Navy Seals singlehandedly on the TV. That’s the true BS, IMHO.

          • Gosh Garr, I somtimes feel like a stranger in a strange land here on GoV (though not with our hosts), but you make me feel less (or differently?) alien.

            Acuara, I was moved by your comment. The lady in my life is a few years older (I’m 68), and has been a mother, but she’s lovely to me. I share Dymphna’s enthusiasm for Robert A Heinlein; in his finest novel (imho), “Stranger in a Strange Land”, he tells us that the Martians only consider people beautiful when older, as they “have their own face”.

  3. Very good article from a good guy, who also participate often in German TV Talkshows on the subject of Islam, etc.

    He is always one of the voices who speak clearly and critically but without becoming offensive.

    By the way the newspaper is not the “Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung / FAZ” – the main conservative newspaper in Germany – but rather the “TAZ”, the main leftwing radical newspaper in Germany.

    Hopefully the crazy lefties read this article and start to rehtink their unreasonable Position, which at the Moment promotes the spreading of redical Islam in Germany.

    • Thank you for the correction. I should have looked more closely at the URL, and not simply taken Guest’s word for the name of the periodical — the link is quite clearly one for Die Tageszeitung. I’ve changed the reference.

  4. Until the 16C in England and the enlightenment in the rest of Europe a little later, the Christian church acted in a similar manner to the Muslims. The Church reformed, the enlightenment began, and the West was made a more humane place because of it. Islam need to reform. Until it does it will be a thorn in the side of civilised people everywhere, despite the apologists from the Left, who contort themselves in an effort to excuse exactly the type of behaviour they rant against in Western society. If any belief system cannot stand because of rational criticism, it is clearly irrational fantasy and also a dictatorship. We cannot just eradicate Islam, lets encourage it to reform.

    • Let’s encourage Muslims to reform by all means but let’s not get slaughtered and enslaved while failing. All limp wristed velvet lovey glovey and no war makes it easy-peasy and inclusive for the ordinary Muslim warshoppers to create bloody chaos. Their are many different types of jehad. As any Muslim will quickly wink. Anyway I guess we will all left and right see soon enough as the plot quickens.

  5. What Mansour is doing is writing from as a Muslim with base European values that are contradictory to Muslim values and culture. He states as obvious the principle that the European values should be followed and enforced. Yet, he does not engage the fact that Islam specifically rejects and fatally punishes those who reject any Islamic teachings. Why would a pious Muslim follow Mansour? There is no engagement of reason: and there can be, since one can follow reason or one can follow Islam. They are completely contradictory and incompatible. So, the “reformers” like Mansour are actually completely rejecting Islam, but are not engaging it on its own terms. They pretend their view should appeal to Muslims, but actually appeals to failed Muslims like themselves.

    Being an Israeli Arab (presumably Muslim), Mansour grew up living the contradiction to Islamic teachings. So, he simply wishes the Muslims from a more strict Islamic background to follow the culture with which he is familiar. But, why should they? And will his children, who are exposed to the culture containing Muslims following Islamic tradition. The Muslims like Mansour, when they are able, drop out of Islam quietly after a generation or two. So, it is paradoxical that as long as he insists on calling himself Muslim, his children are more at risk in Europe than in Israel (not talking about Palestine, which is a totally different kettle of fish).

    I’ll emphasize the point: Basic Islam contains a strict provision to not reform. To reform Islam is to be considered an apostate, and worthy of arbitrary death at the hands of any Muslim. Islam cannot be reformed: it can only be isolated. Cultural non-Muslims like Mansour have no appeal to pious Muslims, and have no Islamic argument. Their main point is that the Koran should be interpreted in historical context, which point goes against every accepted Muslim code of laws or interpretations.

    • That’s basically the core problem. It’s impossible to make an Islam-based argument for modernization (not “reform” because reform in Islam means Wahabi fundamentalism) that would convince anyone at say al Azhar university because anyone guilty of bi’da (innovation) is an apostate and is thus condemned to death according to sharia.

    • Like many Israeli Arabs, he may be more “Israeli” and less “Arab” (in mentality) than he realises.

      It’s quite possible that Israeli Arabs in general are more “Westernised” than “European Arabs”. Indeed, it has also long been my contention that social integration between Arabs and Jews in Israel, as lacking as it may be, is actually doing better than in much of Europe! As a sickening proof of this, I offer that terrorist incidents in Israel that aimed to target Jews *often* have unintentional Arab victims, and that this appears much rarer in Europe!

  6. ** that Muslims don’t want to be cast as ‘victims’ but want to be citizens with equal rights and duties **

    It would be more accurate to say that Muslims don’t want to be citizens with equal rights and duties but to infiltrate, out breed, subvert, sponge off, terrorize, and upend kafir nations.

    They yearn to grind infidels under their Reboks, collect their precious jizya, enslave, and crush the human spirit. 1400 years of Muslim-infidel conflict make the Muslim objective crystal clear: conquest and parasite exhaustion of the host.

    Reform of Islam is a pipe dream. Isolation of the virus is all the once-civilized world, now manifestly scared of its own shadow, should work for.

    • Col.Bunny, Mansour should have said, “not all Muslims want to be…”. Please be aware of the huge peer pressure applied to Western Muslims who might otherwise be willing to abandon their more reprehensible practices. As the writer says, a major problem is the attitude of some leftists, but the fact that some have approached him for advice over child abuse, in Germany of all places, shows potential for reform.

      • Child abuse? How are the Germans doing under the Muslim athlete’s foot? From what I hear the raped, groped, assaulted, disfigured and threatened German adults are not doing too well to put it mildly […]

        NOTE FROM ADMIN:Such an anatomical feat cannot be done mildly. It is also beyond our commenting rules. So far beyond it might as well be on Uranus.

        • I have the potential to reform my next comments. This is not Germany of all places.

      • That’s a good point about not all Muslims but I think the influence of a minority (almost certainly a tiny one) on the Muslim majority is nonexistent. A surrounding Western culture is likely to be more influential, and it is. That father and mother who killed their daughter in St. Louis because she wanted to date a black American and otherwise live as an American teenager is instructive. Other instances of honor killings teach your same lesson — intense peer pressure not to stray off the reservation. There was also a teacher or professor in Egypt, I believe, whose students threw him out of the (second-story?) window after he stated he thought that Islamic doctrine can be/should be interpreted.

        When Muslims turn away from the madness that vacant look in their eyes seems to go away but it is very dangerous for them to do so and I fear the “crabs in a bucket” image is the operative one. Any crab that tries to escape is pulled back by the others. As the Baron himself observed a few years back, Islam is the perfect closed system. My father thought the same thing about my mind when I was 15 but that’s another story entirely.

    • Islam is non-reformable, we know this. Or at least i do and I have no desire to run through the arguments here. They are widely available and anyone who wishes to avail themselves of the facts can do so. I watch Judhi Jasser in the US and shake my head. Such a nice man and I laughed when he once told Robert Spencer, Just don’t call Mohammed a paedophile. Well. He doesn’t get much play sadly because, like guest, he has an important message to the left summed up in a nutshell: Stop playing by the Muslim Brotherhood’s rulebook. Germany’s problems are acute so guest has a larger platform. Most thinkers on the right allow them their space with a caveat like the once provided before the post here because we recognise the sensibility of these voices in tackling the left. Further, in fact, for all it’s horror and destruction, Islam goes through “sleeper periods”, where it’s dormant. The danger of course (and this is theoretical and had nothing to do with the clear and present dangers we face) is that if Islam can be put to sleep for a while, it will surely wake up soon. It always does. Therefore, if a moderate outlook like guest’s were to take hold and large numbers of Muslims feel brave enough to stand up and say, we’re with him (which they don’t), Islam will naturally creep anyway. Even without organised agitation to the nth degree, is it naturally creepy. It’s in the design. So that’ the story with the reform view. We breath a sigh of relief and yet through through carefully, we see it is actually just one more built-in ploy in the ideology of separation/totalitarianism. But it’s a fever we let run, presumably thinking if it can whack out the fullblown Aids, so be it. At times i have found myself thinking, well, if these guys can take the heat off and we can get rid of the salafists et al, THEN we’ll quietly shut down the rest of the mosques and ban Koran. In fact, is this likely to happen? No. People will be so relieved if terror elements are rounded up and carted off, they’ll leave the rest of the Muslims to their sources and, invariable, forment new jihad. They’ll be tired, they’ll be in the mood for peace after victory. They’ll be complacent. So. As welcome as voices of reason are, reason leads me to be very realistic about these reformers. They show up the left, that’s it. At the same time, they are dangerous to the centre. After all most of middle america and middle europe aren’t hard leftists, but the voice of Islamic reason is sure to mollify them. The system’s gamed. Therefore, as horrific as events are, it’s the only way to wipe this [bodily waste] off the face of the earth for once and for all. Burn every last copy of the Koran and erase it from living memory. No disrespect to Guest. His bravery speaks to the best of humanity and is very unIslamic, his being brainwarshed by Islam and presumably raised in the loving family notwithstanding.

      • I’m just the translator. The article was by Ahmad Mansour. I don’t naively believe in the likelihood of ‘reform’, but an article like this from a leftist muslim is useful to quote from.

  7. I’m sorry, but this is such a rubbish. I don’t understand how you can fall for this.

    a) This article assumes that leftists are somehow misguided and had lost their way. Give me a brake! If you look at the history of socialist movement, you’ll see that left ideology is build on idea victimising one social category, breaking up society, starting a civil war and establishing total dictatorship as an ultimate goal. From Lenin to Obama with BLM – all follow same pattern. And those who embrace this sick ideology are not victims, they made a deliberate choice. Same choice as people who join fascist groups or westerners who convert to islam. The idea that left can change is insanely naive and suicidal.
    As a recent example see the story of german-turkush left activist woman who was raped in asylum center and then went on to write an hysterical post defending rapefugees and blaming far-right.
    We’ll rather see Saudi Arabia switching to Christianity than we’ll see left admitting they’ve been wrong.

    b) This guy is just another muslim apologist. Supporter of the myth of “moderate muslims” and true “religion of peace”.
    The problem is not fundamentalism, the problem is islam. Full period. Anyone who claims otherwise is not ready for constructive dialogue. It’s funny how he calls for dialogue and then he admits he’ll never talk to AfD and Pegida. For Christ’s sake, this is just another typical leftist student crap. People of all religions dancing and holding hands in a circle in wonderful peaceful world… But only after we kill all far-right! People like this can not help in de-islamisation. His whining is not different from any left/SJW propaganda, and it’s only meant to distract from the real problem.

    • I wasn’t falling for it. But if we can quote Mansour on the problems of islam Leftists will have more trouble shouting us down.

      “Amongst others these problems are: the growth of a dangerous fundamentalism that is drawing ever more young people into the terror state of IS, the exclusion of women as second-class people, raising children through the pedagogy of fear, a hostility towards sexuality (simultaneously highly sexualised and made taboo), and a literalism that doesn’t understand the Koran in its historic and local context but sees it as dictated by Allah.”

      • Assuming the left will listen to facts. Which is already funny isn’t it?
        I don’t think people embracing sick ideology of total control and world domination care about facts. All facts are already right there on a clear view, been there for ages. Everyone can see them unless he deliberately chooses not to. Just like muslims who will condemn and kill anyone questioning their cult, the left will do the same and proclaim this Mansour a fascist.

        I’m repeting myself, but again, those 2 assumptions that:
        – socialists can be convinced in their wrongness
        – islam is able to reform
        are wrong and very dangerous at current situation.
        We are at war on 2 fronts: jihad warfare with islam and cultural war with left. And when you are at war it’s a very suicidal tactic to hope that your enemies will capitulate by themselves.

    • I agree with everything you say, including the ‘and’s and ‘for’s.

      Kitman, taqiyya, conniving deception. The Muslims sense the world is on the cusp of knowing who they really are…and they are terrified of being naked at last. The Net and sites like GoV did it.

      It’s about time we climb the learning curve…1400 years have gone by and the Interfaith hopes for love and fraternity have been dashed a thousand times.

    • Well yes and no. the left doesn’t run on reason, it runs on emotion. A bloke who is very cerebral and always right 🙂 doesn’t understand that naturally screwed mass emotion combined with rational agitation by some highups, like you say, hooks in the masses, particularly those of the female persuasion with no experience as yet of the hard knocks in life that can bring you to your senses. This is also why I have been thinking so much about how the right needs to embrace emotions in educating leftists. For example, i love Jack buckby, he’s hilarious, but he’s preaching to the choir and his approach is perceived by leftist women as galling. He knows this and he has his finger on the pulse, but the net effect is to send the wymyn further into their box of tissues. So is it smart? Ingrid Carlqvist has spoken of this, she understands. We need to research how to break through emotion using emotion in order to reach our fallen sisters and many of the men too who are almost as soppy as their wives.

  8. It is settled law that everyone – and that includes people brought up to see themselves as Muslims – has the right to change religion, if they so choose.

    If one takes Mill’s argument seriously, that one must hear facts and arguments that go against one’s own opinions, and that those facts and arguments must be expressed by other people who disagree with you, then one could argue that having non-Muslims, or former Muslims, express views that are critical of Islam is a necessary condition of someone being able to change their religious (Islamic) beliefs.

    This argument in a nutshell:

    Those ‘immigrants’ and ‘refugees’ have the right to change their religious beliefs, if they so choose. And they need to hear criticism in order to do so. By shutting down criticism of Islamic beliefs, the radical elite are denying the ‘immigrants’ and ‘refugees’ they claim to be protecting their human rights!

    • Yes, exactly, but shutting down and eliminating rights like this is exactly what leftists do. If they can’t do it directly then they’ll try to do it indirectly by censoring Facebook, etc.

  9. Fascinating. Reading it reminded me of my experiences in social services, only the “immigrants” were generally the lesser of the problem back then. That was before my own reformation (from Leftism) over twenty years ago. I suspect many of the new immigrants are the same that Mansour encounters. He ought to do an exchange program with an American agency, to get the “Full Monty”

  10. Every Muslim doing his bit for the cause. Every little be counts. just one more generation to go.

    • Absolutely wrong and dangerous assumption. First generation of muslims in Europe – mainly Turks who were imported as work migrants in 60’s – weren’t very devoted. Since then radicalization by islamic propaganda has been only rapidly growing every decade. Mosques are popping up everywhere. Muslims becoming more and more alienated from society and in many places they already have built completely parallel universes with sharia law and other niceties.
      Recent study in Netherlands showed that 80% of young turks think that IS fighters in Syria are heroes. And many of those are 3rd generation immigrants. Wanna talk about assimilation?

      So no, generations will not fix the Islam problem. In fact if we continue to ignore the problem and listen to guys like that one, it’s going to get a lot worse.

  11. I have absolutely no use for this idiot. And I came to that conclusion upon “Still, I do think waking more young, Left Germans up to the extremely right-wing truth of Islam is a useful first step.”

    What extremely right-wing truth of islam???? If anything, that would have to be an “extremely left-wing truth” since both systems have a burning desire to control all aspects of the lives of their adherents. Plus, a feverish wish to silence those who disagree.

    If we have to count on a specimen like Ahmad Mansour to bring about that mythic “renaissance” in islam, you might just as well expect Hillary to admit guilt for all her wrongdoings and give up her campaign right NOW.

    This guy has learned absolutely NOTHING.

    • He would make sense if started off by saying that islam is a political ideology rather than a religion and that policy changes might be effective

    • I didn’t think anyone on this site would ‘fall’ for Mansour. I just wanted to put an English version out there (including for people to quote from).

      But people like him, if they can get the ear of the Left and Greens, can be a useful first step towards people in Germany at least talking about the problems of islam. I have watched many of the German TV talk shows on the topic over the last year and any non-muslim who dares mention the problems (eg. someone from AfD) is either called a racist, accused of ‘generalising’ or just shouted down and not even allowed to finish a sentence.

      Mansour and other muslims will at least be allowed to name the problems of islam, make people more aware.

  12. And Outlaw Mike, it’s probably good that you see islam as extremely left-wing and Leftists can see it as extremely right-wing. As long as people start rejecting it as being against their values.

  13. “Still, I do think waking more young, Left Germans up to the extremely right-wing truth of Islam is a useful first step.”

    Not when it tends to reinforce our acquiescence to the fait accompli of more and more Muslims insinuating themselves into the fabric of our societies — the best leverage for Muslims in the future to perpetrate the horrific terror attacks (for worse, far more numerous than 911) that will bring eventually us down.

    Why do we need to reach for Muslim “reformists” to tell us what we already know? It only does (cf. supra).

    • ‘We’ here on this site don’t. But if you know people who will only take the first baby steps towards criticising islam if ‘approved’ by a muslim, send them this article.

      • Last time I tried to do that was 6 years ago or so and the leftist nutcase accused the reformist Muslim of being “self hating”.

        One major aspect of the leftist racism is this: only white people are allowed to be self-critical. Black people are not allowed to criticize black people, etc, or they’re denounced as “self hating”. Those are the rules of the leftist vote farming plantation.

  14. What is left of Islam after Islam is successfully *criticized*? The answer spreads out quite other than it does for the other monotheistic religions.

    Not wishing to get into the weeds of asking what are the proper critical tools – and the ends which honest enquirer always entail, yet how can Islam be *criticized* focused only on its social behavior or expression. A successful bout of criticism must go for jugular – Allah, himself.

    What is left of Islam when Allah has been successfully wrung through the critical wringer? The Jewish and Christian God survived such a squeezing and washing. It is my critical observation that Allah will (can) not. Allah as a deity – his nature & character, the very notion of him – is fundamentally flawed; all the social misbehaviors of Muslims is taprooted into that.

    The outcome, the fallout being, that without the classical, orthodox, historic Allah, Islam is no more. Not even as a habitation for the *cultural, moderate* Muslim with fond memories of great aunts cooking up a storm of Arab dishes.

    The Left’s refusal to look beyond, to go under, the surface of a thing – that is, social behavior – constructs its insights and common-man usefulness. In one form or another, the Left must face off with that hoary primacy – the one about God.

    The Left, though, has not the means or courage to so. It has only one option. It does not go after that jugular (ripping out the social behavior of belief in God, as much as the Left replaces that jugular with itself, remaking the body politic into its image and likeness.

    One witnesses that in how the LGBTQ+ Movement is aggressively (violently?) reorganizing social behavior upon the fundamentals of Queer Theory. And with great success. The Left is not immune from implementing (crusading) its own *Jihad for Sharia*. The Sharia, here, being the overarching (metaphysical?) restructuring of all civil life according to the doctrines Queer Theory.

    All this to say, that the Left is very welcomed in conjoining the global criticism of Islam. The very necessity of it. But only if it acknowledges its fundamental fundamentalist) compatibility to the object of its criticism: to classical, orthodox, historic Islam. Sharia Islam & the Sharia Left are allies, snapping runts of the same litter.

    The Left can succeed in criticizing Islam only after it hog-ties the French Revolution, itself, and puts it under the guillotine.


    Sex threads all, it seems. Intertwines and intersects all topics, all methodologies, all expected outcomes and end results.

    Since this conversation comes down to sex (Islamic sex, Leftist sex; even Greek/Latin sex, Christian sex, Western sex, Enlightenment sex, Revolutionary sex, California sex – of all things – and, most fundamentally, Edenic sex) the article linked below may be of interest. Well, it darn well does . . . it hits this conversation’s g-spot!


    • Hmm… I’ve been reading about early Christians lately, and they seem to differ over whether there was any sex in Eden, at least before the “Fall”.

  16. Leftists and their thought control are very similar to Islamists.

    Mansour is breaking away from that. Give him 5 years, and he’ll be on here with the rest of us.

    • Maybe, but only if in 5 years this website is not taken down by Supreme Sharia Court of Western Khalifate and all its readers are not beheaded.

      With such a rate of breaking away from Islam there is no hope for West.

      Last year 2 millions of muslim migrants entered Germany (legally and illegally). That means a new muslim is entering Germany every 15 seconds.

      Ok, so far we have 1 muslim who is known to be trying to break away. Good start, uh?

    • We don’t got five years buddy. The Muslims are the busiest they have been since the 14th century. Inside the infidels forts now and abuilding barracks at warp speed. Islam loves to waste nice infidel guys – especially lefty type rationalize everything low energy lover types. What do ye think?

  17. Allat – The Moon Goddess

    Isn’t she just an excuse for mohammedan imperialism and the total obedience to the first warlord of this ideology?

    • Well, my wikkan (ie pagan) friend would argue that this was another goddess-centred faith hijacked by the patriarchs!

Comments are closed.