Islam would not have allowed capitalism to grow into the monstrous forms which are presently prevalent in the “civilized" West. The Islamic legislations-whether originally prescribed by Sharia or newly adopted to face new developments within the framework of Sharia-would not have allowed the capitalists to exploit the working people or suck their blood. Islam would have precluded all the evils of capitalism including colonization, war and the enslaving of people. — Mohammad Qutb, Islam: The Misunderstood Religion
Yet in Bahrain, the Shia workers are oppressed by the al-Khalifa dynasty whilst its leader sups with Queen Elizabeth. It's as though the Queen of England is unaware of how the working people of Bahrain and even Qatar are exploited by their Sunni overlords. In Saudi Arabia, one of the Saudi princes is a serial killer of pretty Saudi women who appear to be sex objects to savages.
However, were I a well-known journalist, Bahrain would sue me for libel. There might even be a fatwa on me by a Sunni cleric. However, I refuse to fault the religion of Islam. Rather, I fault the men of Islam who abandon the greater jihad of self control for the lesser jihad of holy war.
How does it make a Muslim man greater than an unbeliever if, despite being provided a wife, a servant and an animal, such a man beats his wife, his servant or his animal? Even the Prophet(as) never beat his camel, nor any of his wives. I have read of no such thing in the Quran, but if the hadiths or even Sharia allowed an exception, then it would be wrong to harm another sentient being, be it a woman, a servant or an animal.
As for another Muslim man, Mohammed (pbuh) he never harmed anyone in Mecca, before and after hijra, except to defend his right to freedom of religion and trade.
Today, the criminals pretending to be good Muslims are called Islamic terrorists, and even have imams to guide them, despite the fact that their Islam is harmful to unbelievers and more moderate Muslims. Yet political Islam is in a way sacrilege when it emphasizes holy war, for war itself suggests that Islam cannot help most men to master their desires and feelings.
Who truly is the loser than the average Muslim man is allowed to beat his wife, his servant or his animal?
If Islam were truly superior to other religions, then why is Mohammad's perfection not habitually emulated? It is surely not a good example for a Muslim man to be waging holy war in these latter days of postmodern life when most of the West is relatively peaceful.
I am not going to go on to rail against the pedophiles who are found among the criminals who hide behind Muhammad but it is sacrilege to abuse young boys and girls. Mohammad (pbuh) did not harm his first wife's slave boy and neither did his wife. Just because a child is mischievous is no reason to use the rod on that child. Isah (sa) warned people not to harm children, who being innocence of adulthood, are destined for heaven due to sudden death.
However, their parents will stand before the Fire while God Almighty shows them how they treated their children. Those parents who were just in their discipline of their children will get reprieve, but woe to any parents who has harmed their children!
Although I do not say any of this as a Muslim but as an apostate to Judeo-Christian religions and an unbeliever of Islam due to my Buddhist origins, none of what I write is more of using the idioms pertaining to Islam to help my Muslim brothers and sisters to widen their understanding of Islam.
For religious extremism is a threat to peace in the world. In America, though, 2.5 percent of all terrorism could be deemed Islamic. That's correct: 97.5 percent of terrorism on American soil was by non-Muslims, mainly Army of God anti-abortion terrorists.
Thus the Islamophobia of America is uncalled for because it would be Christian radicals who are more of a threat to national security than Islamic terrorists, followed by fringe Jewish Defense League terrorists.
The term "evils of capitalism" is bandied about by the Left and the Muslims. This term thus suggests that 911 was actually a precursor to Occupy Wall Street, a critique of globalism. I believe this to be true, rather than using the overused trope of Islamic terrorism.
What if terrorism is actually a warning sign that capitalism is off track? For this lust for money is but a root of all evil, be it miserliness, wars, and even pedophilia. Those criminal terrorists of the Moslem brand know this too, because their Sharia is a way of returning the Middle East to a time before Mohammed (pbuh) while pretending they wish to return to the glory days of Islamic conquest.
I see it as a tragedy, and the members of al-Qaeda are a bunch of men hoodwinked by a charlatan pretending to be an imam. Why, the man is barely a great surgeon! How good can his Islamic jurisprudence truly be?
Ultimately though, I am not a threat to the criminal terrorists. To them I am just an ignorant unbeliever. My words do not count as much before a mullah. Even so, I would fully embrace the evils of capitalism rather than become a Muslim because the criminal terrorists have sullied the name of Mohammed as much as those Islamophobes have.
And yet, the Muslims have all the right in the world to declare that there is no god greater than God.
Showing posts with label capitalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label capitalism. Show all posts
20131130
Dear Beijing, We The West Do Not Want War, Just Your Tourist Dollars (satire)
There is growing evidence that at some point in the not-so-distant future, Beijing will own a significant amount of shares in corporations which currently are considered Western business entities.
A few of the West's elites have been groomed by gifts given to them when they visit China in exchange for favouring Chinese businessmen from Beijing whose associates in Hong Kong, Macau, Shanghai and other major cities both in China and overseas (especially in the Middle East, the UK, and US as well as Africa and both North and South America).
There is also suspicion that during the Gaddafi era, Libya had purchased munitions which originated in China, including chemical weapons which fell into the hands of al Qaeda during the on-going proxy war in Syria.
Complicit in this global reach by China are mass media outlets such as CNN, FOX, NBC and various media empires owned by Conrad Black and Rupert Murdock whose company stock is owned by Chinese interests, both businessmen and various fronts owned by the Chinese army.
Today it makes perfect business sense for China to compete with America and the EU for a greater share of the world's wealth.
Also, there are government loans China has made to America which could have been jeopardized when President Obama prorogued Congress because the GOP vowed never to let ObamaCare become funded after it was enacted.
Had Beijing panicked, it could have called in multi-billion dollar loans that help keep the US economy afloat in today's stock market.
However, mainstream media outlets have been subtly promoting the booming Chinese economy, an economy that involves what the West would call "slave labour".
In villages all across that nation, there are volunteers who manufacture clothing, plush toys and related material made of textiles for the good of China, some of whom are in prisons.
As well, the average wage of Chinese employees who work for Foxconn, maker of iPhones, is under $1000 / month. Most of them work more than 40 hours a week with overtime exposing many of them in excess of 80 hours.
Given that the typical worker may work more than 63 hours a week at over 9 hours a day. In contrast, workers may spent less than 15 hours resting and at leisure. In fact, it is likely that workers spend up to 16 hours working in a given day with 8 hours devoted mainly to eating and sleep.
Such work conditions are deplorable since it has contributed to work-related stress.
One of the side effects of such stress as the recent clash between Chinese Han workers and Chinese minorities mainly from Western China (XInjiang), where a mix of Muslim Hui who were moved there from south-eastern China near the border with Vietnam to counter the influence of non-Sinitic Turkish people (Uighurs) in Xinjiang.
As part of their propaganda, Beijing has claimed that Uighurs are terrorists, when historically they have been freedom fighters dedicated from freeing their Turkic homeland from foreign invaders (the Hui and Han people moved there) after the Soviet era was established and the end of the Great War in 1918.
Such movements of Sinitic people is done to reduce the population density of the region China has conquered including regions such as Xinjiang and Tibet. Historically, Beijing had directed Chinese Hui warlords under its control to conquer the Uighurs due to fear of invasion by Russia along the western border. In response the Uighur warlords aligned with Moscow.
As a result, the Soviet Union fought a proxy war with China with American and British interests supplying munitions to both sides. Much of the German munitions captured by both the UK and the US flowed through the Chinese conduit consisting of volunteers from Shanghai who supported the Allied Nations predominated by the UK and the US with support by Japan, who provided for passage to the trenches in Normandy.
Returning to the Chinese invasion scenario described in this article, I submit the hypothesis that it will mainly an economic one. Eventually in time, so much of the West will be owned by China that the West will openly encourage mass media outlets to spread the propaganda that the East and West will soon become one.
Eventually this will lead to the positive result of increased space travel because both the Eastern hegemony and the Western hegemony of socio-economic progress will influence Big Business and their corporate monoliths to not only invest in China but also allow up to 49% ownership of Western companies.
As well, the resulting economic growth will allow corporate interests to develop space travel aligned along a mix of corporate and government agreements to bring capitalism to the stars, both aligned to the Chinese state capitalist model as well as the Western free-market capitalist model.
Therefore I would like to deny the scenario given in the blog article presented with my opinions on this matter as presented to you.
This scenario sounds distinctly anti-Chinese and indicates a neo-conservative tendency for hyperbole which is out of proportion to the current situation both in the West and in China.
In response to counterarguments that I am pro-Chinese, I also deny that Beijing supports my opinion. Indeed, if they do not already known that I endorse caution about the tendency towards Chinese domination of the West in both the economic and political sphere.
For world domination of the idea that China rules the world is as vile as the idea that America, the EU or even Canada rules the world.
How can there be freedom if China were to not only export its manufactured goods to the West without the West imposing tariffs to protect their respective markets, but also to "export" its people?
Perhaps Beijing might be doing this by supporting Chinese tours in the West. However, it is likely that only the Chinese elites and their supporters among the upper middle class could afford such a move, provided that they retain the Chinese culture.
Yet this same culture also implies a sort of entitlement, which on the long run may explain the prevalence of narcissism in Chinese in spite of their emphasis on teamwork over individual work.
Holding onto cultural traditions which risk the emphasis on self esteem may be disturbing the character of the Chinese people to the point where the narcissistic personality arises, as long as the world revolves around them. For there is a hint of egocentricity occulted by the emphasis on teamwork.
All aspirations of world domination by China externalizes the character disturbances of the Chinese that narcissism brings out in people.
Likewise, any aspiration of world domination by the West is a reflection of the disturbed character that a narcissist truly is.
Having stated this point, I would consider the scenario in the accompanying article as being far-fetched because it retains a hint of Cold War politics in its rhetoric.
In conclusion, the points I have made in this article make assumptions about the economic, psychological, and social aspects of both the East and the West. While the first two aspects are mentioned, and explored in some detail, the social aspects are briefly mentioned.
I am of the opinion that the Chinese would not invade the West as an army when it is better to let the Chinese tourists come visit us. Additionally, it is better to let the Chinese businessmen come trade with us than to plan war with the West in the classic context.
So my response to China is: "We do not want war; we only want your tourist dollars!"
A few of the West's elites have been groomed by gifts given to them when they visit China in exchange for favouring Chinese businessmen from Beijing whose associates in Hong Kong, Macau, Shanghai and other major cities both in China and overseas (especially in the Middle East, the UK, and US as well as Africa and both North and South America).
There is also suspicion that during the Gaddafi era, Libya had purchased munitions which originated in China, including chemical weapons which fell into the hands of al Qaeda during the on-going proxy war in Syria.
Complicit in this global reach by China are mass media outlets such as CNN, FOX, NBC and various media empires owned by Conrad Black and Rupert Murdock whose company stock is owned by Chinese interests, both businessmen and various fronts owned by the Chinese army.
Today it makes perfect business sense for China to compete with America and the EU for a greater share of the world's wealth.
Also, there are government loans China has made to America which could have been jeopardized when President Obama prorogued Congress because the GOP vowed never to let ObamaCare become funded after it was enacted.
Had Beijing panicked, it could have called in multi-billion dollar loans that help keep the US economy afloat in today's stock market.
However, mainstream media outlets have been subtly promoting the booming Chinese economy, an economy that involves what the West would call "slave labour".
In villages all across that nation, there are volunteers who manufacture clothing, plush toys and related material made of textiles for the good of China, some of whom are in prisons.
As well, the average wage of Chinese employees who work for Foxconn, maker of iPhones, is under $1000 / month. Most of them work more than 40 hours a week with overtime exposing many of them in excess of 80 hours.
Given that the typical worker may work more than 63 hours a week at over 9 hours a day. In contrast, workers may spent less than 15 hours resting and at leisure. In fact, it is likely that workers spend up to 16 hours working in a given day with 8 hours devoted mainly to eating and sleep.
Such work conditions are deplorable since it has contributed to work-related stress.
One of the side effects of such stress as the recent clash between Chinese Han workers and Chinese minorities mainly from Western China (XInjiang), where a mix of Muslim Hui who were moved there from south-eastern China near the border with Vietnam to counter the influence of non-Sinitic Turkish people (Uighurs) in Xinjiang.
As part of their propaganda, Beijing has claimed that Uighurs are terrorists, when historically they have been freedom fighters dedicated from freeing their Turkic homeland from foreign invaders (the Hui and Han people moved there) after the Soviet era was established and the end of the Great War in 1918.
Such movements of Sinitic people is done to reduce the population density of the region China has conquered including regions such as Xinjiang and Tibet. Historically, Beijing had directed Chinese Hui warlords under its control to conquer the Uighurs due to fear of invasion by Russia along the western border. In response the Uighur warlords aligned with Moscow.
As a result, the Soviet Union fought a proxy war with China with American and British interests supplying munitions to both sides. Much of the German munitions captured by both the UK and the US flowed through the Chinese conduit consisting of volunteers from Shanghai who supported the Allied Nations predominated by the UK and the US with support by Japan, who provided for passage to the trenches in Normandy.
Returning to the Chinese invasion scenario described in this article, I submit the hypothesis that it will mainly an economic one. Eventually in time, so much of the West will be owned by China that the West will openly encourage mass media outlets to spread the propaganda that the East and West will soon become one.
Eventually this will lead to the positive result of increased space travel because both the Eastern hegemony and the Western hegemony of socio-economic progress will influence Big Business and their corporate monoliths to not only invest in China but also allow up to 49% ownership of Western companies.
As well, the resulting economic growth will allow corporate interests to develop space travel aligned along a mix of corporate and government agreements to bring capitalism to the stars, both aligned to the Chinese state capitalist model as well as the Western free-market capitalist model.
Therefore I would like to deny the scenario given in the blog article presented with my opinions on this matter as presented to you.
This scenario sounds distinctly anti-Chinese and indicates a neo-conservative tendency for hyperbole which is out of proportion to the current situation both in the West and in China.
In response to counterarguments that I am pro-Chinese, I also deny that Beijing supports my opinion. Indeed, if they do not already known that I endorse caution about the tendency towards Chinese domination of the West in both the economic and political sphere.
For world domination of the idea that China rules the world is as vile as the idea that America, the EU or even Canada rules the world.
How can there be freedom if China were to not only export its manufactured goods to the West without the West imposing tariffs to protect their respective markets, but also to "export" its people?
Perhaps Beijing might be doing this by supporting Chinese tours in the West. However, it is likely that only the Chinese elites and their supporters among the upper middle class could afford such a move, provided that they retain the Chinese culture.
Yet this same culture also implies a sort of entitlement, which on the long run may explain the prevalence of narcissism in Chinese in spite of their emphasis on teamwork over individual work.
Holding onto cultural traditions which risk the emphasis on self esteem may be disturbing the character of the Chinese people to the point where the narcissistic personality arises, as long as the world revolves around them. For there is a hint of egocentricity occulted by the emphasis on teamwork.
All aspirations of world domination by China externalizes the character disturbances of the Chinese that narcissism brings out in people.
Likewise, any aspiration of world domination by the West is a reflection of the disturbed character that a narcissist truly is.
Having stated this point, I would consider the scenario in the accompanying article as being far-fetched because it retains a hint of Cold War politics in its rhetoric.
In conclusion, the points I have made in this article make assumptions about the economic, psychological, and social aspects of both the East and the West. While the first two aspects are mentioned, and explored in some detail, the social aspects are briefly mentioned.
I am of the opinion that the Chinese would not invade the West as an army when it is better to let the Chinese tourists come visit us. Additionally, it is better to let the Chinese businessmen come trade with us than to plan war with the West in the classic context.
So my response to China is: "We do not want war; we only want your tourist dollars!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)