A Proposal: A Formal Anti-Islam Discussion Forum

Over at the 1389 Counterjihad Blog, I have posted an essay where I articulate why the A.I.M. (the Anti-Islam Movement) should have a central site exclusively dedicated to pan-Counterjihad discussion and debate about the problem of Islam. I refer the reader there.

In the meantime, in my search for a place where I can satisfy my appetite for robust discussion and debate about the problem of Islam (since I found the censoring atmospherics at Gates of Vienna a bit offputting (even though I gave it the college try of participating rather voluminously for months in various comments threads there), and since late last year I was banned for the umpteenth time -- for specious reasons as usual -- from Jihad Watch comments), I recently found a general discussion forum called SciForums.com which, although it is mostly dedicated to non-Islam issues, does have a couple of rather large sub-categorical nooks in its "World" subsection where I found other members were discussing this, that and the other Islam-related thing. Unfortunately but unsurprisingly, most of them currently seem rather PC MC. What led me to join and begin to participate there was, as I mentioned in my post immediately downstairs of this one, the accidental discovery of a refreshingly un-PC MC commenter on that forum -- who, alas, has vacated the premises since 2008. (Apparently, he was not banned, as he is not on their official ban list; however, he may well have finally left (he joined in 2004) in a huff because of their generally PC MC ambiance.)

Speaking of the PC MC ambiance at SciForums.com, today I received a "warning" from some representative there by private email. He wrote me:

Dear Hesperado,

You have received a warning at SciForums.com.

Reason:
-------
Inappropriate Language

Please be aware that characterising an entire group of people based on the actions of a subgroup is a form of bigotry. You're unlikely to last long on sciforums posting statements of the form "All Muslims are X", especially without any supporting evidence.

It is unlikely in the extreme that a billion people are all alike.
-------

Warnings serve as a reminder to you of the forum's rules, which you are expected to understand and follow.

All the best,
SciForums.com

He then quoted from one of my recent comments there as apparent evidence of what worried him, where, after a typically PC MC commenter had written:

...the Afghans don't really hate americans they are just have a violent allergic reaction to foreign powers on their soil:

Here's a list of the nations that have tried and fail to occupy Afghanistan:

Persia 728 BC
Macedonia 330BC
Turkish Selucids 312 BC
Arabia 642 AD
Mongols 1370 AD
Mughals 1526 AD
Afghans 1709 AD...

I responded:

"I wouldn't be surprised that Afghans invaded themselves, and tried and failed to occupy themselves. They're that barmy."

I again quoted that typically PC MC person as continuing, about whom the Afghans had kicked out in history:

Persians 1839... See? It has nothing to do with religion, they kicked persian ass too.

And I responded:

"Muslims fight and kill Muslims all the time; that doesn't make their internecine violence less Islamic. In fact, that epitomizes Islam -- violent outside and in.”

That's all the evidence the SciForums.com guy adduced.

So, my response to him was as follows (my quotes of his words are in italics, mine framed by quotation marks):

Please be aware that characterising an entire group of people based on the actions of a subgroup is a form of bigotry. You're unlikely to last long on sciforums posting statements of the form "All Muslims are X", especially without any supporting evidence.

"I never said the word "all". When a person says "Muslims are X" it may, or may not, mean "all Muslims". While I also characterized "Islam" pejoratively (e.g., "that epitomizes Islam -- violent outside and in") I was critiquing Islam, not all the people who follow it. One may logically infer that critiquing Islam necessarily includes the same critique against all its members, but it seems reasonable and fair to wait until the critic has actually explicitly expressed that inference as a claim before accusing him of doing so."

It is unlikely in the extreme that a billion people are all alike.

"This is both a Straw Man and a Red Herring, since

a) I never said a billion Muslims are all alike and

b) generally speaking, a members of a group can share certain characteristics without necessarily being "all alike": Specifically, a large globally disparate group like Islam can possess certain common, unifying characteristics among all its members, without that totality of people being monolithically alike. In fact, there is no coherent sense to the denotation of a group at all (whether it is composed of 10 members or a billion) unless its members share at least one or more characteristics -- otherwise, there would be no group there to talk about at all.

"Beyond that, I have for quite some time noticed an amusing tendency among people concerned to avoid (and/or try to suppress) bigotry in this regard: when it comes to critiquing Muslims, Islam is "too diverse" and "not monolithic" enough to be "painted with a broad brush"; but when Muslims are praised in one way or another, suddenly that concern for "painting with a broad brush" is thrown out the window and a billion Muslims (sans, of course, the expendable appendage of a Tiny Minority of Bad Apples) suddenly become quite "alike".

"In closing, I find your warning an unfortunate tendency; for, if I owned or supervised a discussion forum like this, I wouldn't warn participants who believe differently from me and whose belief that condemning Islam and those who follow its pernicious and outrageously anti-liberal tenets insults my intelligence as much as my putative "bigotry" seems to offend your sensibilities: I would let them be free to express their disagreements with me on this issue and others -- particularly when their comments (like mine) are worded in a relatively mature and intelligent fashion, without cuss words, ad hominems, snide sarcasm that tends to create an inflammatory conversational climate, insults to other participants, etc. (which, by the way, I notice goes on rather a lot on your forum)."