The Unvaxinated = the Taliban

[Dill]

(08-31-2021, 03:47 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: You don't think - in your heart of hearts - that if western extremists had the kind of control the Taliban had, they wouldn't be doing a lot of the same shit?

I do agree that the comparisons do more harm than good, fwiw - I'm not saying this to try and do so. I just believe - given religion's part in a lot of the most horrible things in human history - the only things separating western extremists and groups like the Taliban are the Pacific Ocean and the amount of influence they have on their given regions.

(08-31-2021, 04:13 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Can you define "western extemists?"  I'm just curious what groups of people you have living in the western world that would behave similarly given the opportunity.  And given your answer, it would be interesting to explore how many of these people you think exist.  Is it dozens?  Hundreds?  Thousands?  Millions?  I would assume it's gotta be a large number if we're using hypothetical where they've taken control.

Keep in mind, "a lot of the same shit" includes beheading people, burning people alive, throwing gay people off of buildings, taking child sex slaves, cutting women's fingers off for wearing nail polish, beating and then shooting a mother in front of her children, etc.  (Note: I can find links to examples of each of these occuring all within the last 90 days.  I also could provide dozens of more equally heinous descriptions.)

I have some thoughts on this. I'm guessing BigP means "religious extremists" of the most illiberal variety who, like the Taliban, would work to turn back civil rights for women and gays. So two points: 

1. Most important--in the US our liberal institutions and laws limit the degree to which "extremists" can convert their beliefs to law. So that makes it hard to directly count them or assess what they would "really" do. Some of their leaders also dissemble their positions, so as not to embarrass the politicians they support with money and sermons. Best, then, to look at what happens when they can affect laws in other countries. First example which comes to my mind is Scott Lively, founder of Abiding Truth Ministries in the US,* and Watchmen on the Walls in Latvia. At one time he was director of the CA branch of The American Family Association which, according to Wikipedia, owns some 200 radio stations in 33 states. All these organizations are dedicated to rolling back gay rights. 

Anyway, Lively appears to have been instrumental in pushing for the death penalty for gays in Uganda. Liberal pushback reduced the penalty to life in prison. "Ugandan MPs Press for Death Penalty for Homosexual Acts."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/15/ugandan-mps-press-for-death-penalty-for-homosexual-acts
"Uganda's New Anti-homosexuality Law Was Inspired by American Activists"
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/12/uganda-passes-law-punishes-homosexuality-life-imprisonment/356365/

You'd never guess it from their website (https://thefellowshipfoundation.org/), which simply encourages modeling Christian behavior, but the Fellowship Foundation also had a hand in Uganda. So yes, hard to determine what such groups "really" want, just based on what they can do in this country.
"Aid Agencies: Make Sure You Are Not Funding Gay Conversion Therapy."
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/africa-us-christian-right-50m/

American organizations also link with "Family first" style groups in Eastern Europe and Russia to oppose gay rights and encourage women to return to "traditional" roles. Difficult to count how many millions of Americans support these groups, but they certainly outnumber the Taliban. https://www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/news/us-christian-right-wing-groups-financed-anti-rights-campaigns-in-europe/

I cannot stress enough, we ought to recognize that hostility to women's and gay's rights is a general feature of right wing authoritarianism, not simply limited to Taliban or "Muslims."  In Hungary, soon after Orban came to power, they snuffed all women's studies programs in their universities. I have argued elsewhere that fascism can be understood, in part, as a kind of masculine identity movement.

2. I have a problem making "cutting off fingers" a useful term of comparison or decisive means of differentiation, as opposed to a group's stated beliefs and organizational structure and goals. In 1968, Afghans were very religious, but no one was cutting off women's fingers. The country was safer than many in Europe for tourist travel. 

So I ask--why are they NOW cutting off fingers and beheading women. Telling us they are "religious extremists" or "human scum" has no explanatory value. If I understand you BigP, you are asking what  Americans might behave like were they raked over the coals of war for three generations now as the Afghans have been, forced several times to reconsitute civil authority via religious leadership, all preaching that the calamities befalling them are caused by straying from God's literal word. Hard to say for sure, but we do know that a lot of Americans have now gone to war in developing countries, and in each war, and some of those have been accused of "atrocities," which they presumably would not have committed had they never been to war. And there would likely be more were they not subject to the Law of War and military discipline. So how would a mass of American civilians fare after a decade of war, left without central government, and forced to turn to "strong" religious leaders to reconstitute order? Or three decades--long enough for an entire generation to miss secular, democratic schooling?  I do know we can't get answers to questions like this by forbidding comparisons, because the other side is "scum." 

*Not the Black Church in Philly.