"Christian" Fundamentalism in West

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21336
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

"Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Philip » 23 Jul 2011 18:49

The horrific terror attack in Norway where 91 people were killed by an alleged "Christian fundamantalist",has opened a pandora's box of an issue which has received scant attemtion in recent years by the world's nations.Why? This is because the greatest "Christian" fundamentalists have been the very leaders of the western world,"Marshal" George 'Duya" Bush and his "Deputy" Tony Blair, to name the most infamous.The lies and chicanery that duped the entire world into believing that Sadddam posed a miliatry threat to the west with his (non-existant) WMDs ,saw an illegal war being waged whose key priority was to gain control of Iraq's oil.where hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians were killed in so-called "collateral damage" attacks,torture/concentration camps set up at Abu Ghraib,Camp Gitmo and other secret locations worldwide with secret "rendition flights" whisking away suspects,many innocent .These illegal wars have now extended to Afghanistan and Libya and one sees no sign of this "expeditionary" zeal of these "Christian" fundamentalist states from abating.

The military might of the west has been abused by these fundamentallist "crusaders",Bush and Blair openly displaying their "religion" on their chests,a gross abuse of the truth of Christianity which is Christ's gospel of Love not War.Sadly,their successors show little sign of displaying more sincere Christain values in global affairs.The Euopean phenomenon where mass immigration and political refugees swamped many EU states,was allowed so that socialist parties could win elections has had its backlash with neo-Nazi and right-wing fundamentalist groups growing in strength.The British extremist BNP won a seat in the EU parliament for the first time and just a few days in Germany,Rudolph Hess' (if the man buried in it was really Hess,much evidence against it) grave was removed because it had become a rallying point for Neo-Nazis.

Norway,which allowed thousands of LTTE activists to enjoy its hospitality and for decades tried every trick in the book to promote the LTTE's interests in Sri Lanka through its heavily biased "peace initiatives" is now a victim itself of one of the nost horrific terrorist attacks ever.Sadly,like the British,who allowed the Paki fundamentalist diaspora to take root like cockroaches in a small island called Gt.Britain,found out to its own horror that the terror unleashed was "home grown" ,so hve the Norwegians found out to their horror that the perpetrator was a 32 old white "Christain" fundamentalist. .

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... eivik.html

Norway attacks: profile of suspect Anders Behring Breivik
Anders Behring Breivik, the main suspect in the Norwegian bomb attacks and shootings, has been described by police as a Christian fundamentalist with right-wing views.
Last edited by ramana on 23 Jul 2011 20:02, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Title Changed to make the topic specific

sanjeevpunj
BRFite
Posts: 971
Joined: 04 Sep 2009 13:10

Re: "Christian" Fundamentlism

Postby sanjeevpunj » 23 Jul 2011 19:05

Phillip,it is interesting you brought up this thread. There is a lot of questions waiting to be answered about why UK and USA get together and unite on a bashing spree, with France joining in, and rest of Europe sending its forces in support.White dominance is a disease linked with Christian crusades.Have yet to hear of a Christian crusade that is peaceful, they defy all that Jesus taught, by their violent approach to the rest of the world that does not agree to them. Interesting the Pope never opposes such violent governments, and if he does voice concern,he is ignored comfortably. It is part of Nostradamus's well predicted plight of the church, and worse is likely to come, specially the much feared two Nuclear bombs, that are expected to destroy Vatican, one falls in the sea near rome, poisoning sea life, while the other is blown up in the air over Rome,and does much damage. The scenario leaps up to my mind each time I read of violence in Europe.Recent strategic movement of Iranian Navy is also an indication towards this possibility.
Good luck with the thread!

Fidel Guevara
BRFite
Posts: 348
Joined: 21 Jan 2010 19:24
Location: Pandora

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby Fidel Guevara » 23 Jul 2011 19:18

Philip wrote:The horrific terror attack in Norway where 91 people were killed by an alleged "Christian fundamantalist",has opened a pandora's box of an issue which has received scant attemtion in recent years by the world's nations.Why? This is because the greatest "Christian" fundamentalists have been the very leaders of the western world,"Marshal" George 'Duya" Bush and his "Deputy" Tony Blair, to name the most infamous.The lies and chicanery that duped the entire world into believing that Sadddam posed a miliatry threat to the west with his (non-existant) WMDs ,saw an illegal war being waged whose key priority was to gain control of Iraq's oil.where hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians were killed in so-called "collateral damage" attacks,torture/concentration camps set up at Abu Ghraib,Camp Gitmo and other secret locations worldwide with secret "rendition flights" whisking away suspects,many innocent .These illegal wars have now extended to Afghanistan and Libya and one sees no sign of this "expeditionary" zeal of these "Christian" fundamentalist states from abating.

The military might of the west has been abused by these fundamentallist "crusaders",Bush and Blair openly displaying their "religion" on their chests,a gross abuse of the truth of Christianity which is Christ's gospel of Love not War.Sadly,their successors show little sign of displaying more sincere Christain values in global affairs.The Euopean phenomenon where mass immigration and political refugees swamped many EU states,was allowed so that socialist parties could win elections has had its backlash with neo-Nazi and right-wing fundamentalist groups growing in strength.The British extremist BNP won a seat in the EU parliament for the first time and just a few days in Germany,Rudolph Hess' (if the man buried in it was really Hess,much evidence against it) grave was removed because it had become a rallying point for Neo-Nazis.

Norway,which allowed thousands of LTTE activists to enjoy its hospitality and for decades tried every trick in the book to promote the LTTE's interests in Sri Lanka through its heavily biased "peace initiatives" is now a victim itself of one of the nost horrific terrorist attacks ever.Sadly,like the British,who allowed the Paki fundamentalist diaspora to take root like cockroaches in a small island called Gt.Britain,found out to its own horror that the terror unleashed was "home grown" ,so hve the Norwegians found out to their horror that the perpetrator was a 32 old white "Christain" fundamentalist. .

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... eivik.html

Norway attacks: profile of suspect Anders Behring Breivik
Anders Behring Breivik, the main suspect in the Norwegian bomb attacks and shootings, has been described by police as a Christian fundamentalist with right-wing views.


There are Christian, Jewish and Hindu fundamentalists, but they make up a tiny fraction of fundamentalist crimes worldwide...the vast majority are from the Religion of Peace. So why this thread about a relatively small issue?

Last month I drove through central Ohio, and stopped at a small mofussil township where I was probably the first brown person they had seen in a week. The biggest institution in this place was the "First Church of God", and lots of fiery messages posted outside. Very religious place, no doubt full of "fundamentalists" and all with guns as well. Typical "God and Guns" place. I was there for a 30 minute break and did feel a little creepy with everyone staring at me, but not really felt unsafe. Try doing that in Parachinar.

sanjeevpunj
BRFite
Posts: 971
Joined: 04 Sep 2009 13:10

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby sanjeevpunj » 23 Jul 2011 19:20

^^^^^^Perhaps the thread should be just "Religious Fundamentalism" so that it covers the entire topic well.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby Arjun » 23 Jul 2011 19:32

Its too early to jump to conclusions....the Norway tragedy can be termed as 'Christian fundamentalism' only if the motivation is based on Christianist feelings or is driven by a religious, anti-Muslim or anti-immigrant agenda. Its for these same reasons that the LTTE cannot be termed Hindu terrorists, even though the bulk of the LTTE was Hindu.

Also there is no explanation as to why this Norwegian fanatic would choose the targets that he did in this horrendous outrage - I don't see any link to his supposed agenda.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby brihaspati » 23 Jul 2011 19:48

There are speculations about the supposedly Christian affiliations of the "inner" circle of the LTTE. Several groups of insurgents of non-European origins are known to have claimed Christian affiliation to gain support and resources from certain "western" countries - our own NE corner for example.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24827
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby chetak » 23 Jul 2011 19:52

brihaspati wrote:There are speculations about the supposedly Christian affiliations of the "inner" circle of the LTTE. Several groups of insurgents of non-European origins are known to have claimed Christian affiliation to gain support and resources from certain "western" countries - our own NE corner for example.


Their supporters in India too are of.............. :)

This is no speculation.

No need to go into how the gentlemen from norway played their LTTE hand.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby RajeshA » 23 Jul 2011 19:55

Arjun wrote:Its too early to jump to conclusions....the Norway tragedy can be termed as 'Christian fundamentalism' only if the motivation is based on Christianist feelings or is driven by a religious, anti-Muslim or anti-immigrant agenda. Its for these same reasons that the LTTE cannot be termed Hindu terrorists, even though the bulk of the LTTE was Hindu.

Also there is no explanation as to why this Norwegian fanatic would choose the targets that he did in this horrendous outrage - I don't see any link to his supposed agenda.

++1

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby Arjun » 23 Jul 2011 19:57

I am not disputing the existence of Christian terrorism. In fact, some of India's NE insurgency groups are driven by religious considerations and need to be correctly termed as Christian terrorist organizations.

In this particular case, I am just saying we need to understand the motivations for this sick mind better.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17077
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby Rahul M » 23 Jul 2011 19:57

>> Several groups of insurgents of non-European origins are known to have claimed Christian affiliation to gain support and resources from certain "western" countries - our own NE corner for example.

inversion of cause and effect IMHO.
in NE esp nagaland it was the other way around, violence came hand in hand with missionaries from a certain country. the declared goal of NSCN was to establish a christian theological state.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3349
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby Rony » 23 Jul 2011 20:06

Anders Breivik's facebook page says that his Religious Views as Christian and Political Views as Conservative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOS3dYUK4js

See at 0.52

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism

Postby brihaspati » 23 Jul 2011 20:06

Rahul M wrote:>> Several groups of insurgents of non-European origins are known to have claimed Christian affiliation to gain support and resources from certain "western" countries - our own NE corner for example.

inversion of cause and effect IMHO.
in NE esp nagaland it was the other way around, violence came hand in hand with missionaries from a certain country. the declared goal of NSCN was to establish a christian theological state.


I am trying to take a "nuanced" approach - pretending I am convinced of someone's peaceful intentions, while I eliminate the other animal at a more advanced stage of Rabies. :P

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby symontk » 23 Jul 2011 20:32

At present I am not aware of any issues in Norway by which one person can become a fundamentalist. I believe this is as same as the attacks that keep on happening over several school / university campuses in which students kill people indiscriminately for silly reasons. But there is a difference here that he has bombed a government building and killed scores of people in a resort

Having said that, all christians including me is condemning this inhuman act. There is no justification whatsoever for any thing like this. Also one need to understand deeply how Christian structures are built and whether it promotes fundamentalistism. Serious soul searching has to be done to find this out

When one becomes a Christian, one has to become gentle too. If not I dont understand what Christianity is that. Regarding the crusades and Bush, there is one difference. During crusades, Pope promoted it, but for Bush he did oppose the move. It will be better for everyone if Western countries stop, acts of War for natural resources, financial colonalism, invasions, sanctions etc

Jaik
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 21 Jul 2011 14:49

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Jaik » 23 Jul 2011 21:07

We have to define fundamentalism and extremism.Are they one and the same? are they two sides of a same coin? What is the difference between the two?

How many christian fundamentalist/extremist incited violent incidents have occured. How much of the violence is incited by their religious views? How much of it is due to the socio-political views?(anti immigration)

One also has to make distinction between Individuals and countries/ rulers etc...

9/11, 7/7, Madrid/Bali atrocities have provoked rage in anglo saxon/caucasian populations world wide, in general. There is an increase in the support for far right issues(not parties)politically across Europe(Holland,Switzerland, France,Britain) In my humble opinion, it is too early to draw conclusions about the tragic events in Norway.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24827
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby chetak » 23 Jul 2011 21:22

symontk wrote: Regarding the crusades and Bush, there is one difference. During crusades, Pope promoted it, but for Bush he did oppose the move.



Wasn't that a sectarian thing? :)

The pope and the bush belong to different churches!

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby symontk » 23 Jul 2011 21:26

Wasn't that a sectarian thing?

The pope and the bush belong to different churches


Yes but, apart from that difference, everything else is unfortunately the same

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24827
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby chetak » 23 Jul 2011 21:30

symontk wrote:
Wasn't that a sectarian thing?

The pope and the bush belong to different churches


Yes but, apart from that difference, everything else is unfortunately the same


That is one BIG difference and apart from that it's also a (insecure) european thing to oppose the US every where in the world. :)

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12746
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Aditya_V » 23 Jul 2011 21:41

The problem is media aldready labelled it as a righist anti-Islam Attack. I feel this fellow crime is like Nathuram Godse, a tragic event somthing which will be used by Pro Islamists(secularists in India) to brush aside the dirt with respect to Islamic terror until it becomes to big a problem to be easily dealt with.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3389
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby vera_k » 23 Jul 2011 21:48

^^^

Not possible. Right wing politicians have a lot of power in the West. Check out how many US Presidents, UK Prime Ministers and French Presidents have been from right wing parties. In the USA, the newest right wing generation is also better educated than the lefties.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12746
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Aditya_V » 23 Jul 2011 21:57

To tell the truth left wing in the West is far more Right wing than the BJP. Some sections of Indian Left put out views for payments from Foreign nations.

IndraD
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7551
Joined: 26 Dec 2008 15:38
Location: भारत का निश्चेत गगन

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby IndraD » 23 Jul 2011 22:52

I do not construe this as an example of christian extremism, even if this guy hated muslims and immigration, he ended up killing 100 people who were christians & white, his is a typical case of twisted ideology.

Another deviation is attacking his own country, if he disliked immigration, right way would have been raising awareness about it and winning some seats in parliament.

There are many involved on ground, he had time to walk away after triggering off bomb this means he aquired skills in making very sophisticated bomb, he must have recieved training some where, also you need many parts to assemble a bomb, over this the oever all modus operandi has signature mark of a terrorist operation where attention was diverted by a massive blast followed by real mayhem (26/11?)

let the whole truth come out, it is very very kileyl that he has links with Irish terrorists or AQ operatives

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21336
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Philip » 23 Jul 2011 23:21

I used the word "Christian" as "Islamist" teror has been so labelled.There is nothing Chistian or Muslim with such terrorit entities and individuals,but a warped blinkered vision of their roots/religion etc.,and intolerance towards other ethnic/religious groups leads them to contemplate such despicable acts.The Bush analogy is an actual fact.A combination of neo-cons allied with the Christian right brought "Christain" Dubya into the Whiite House.What happened then?The invasion of Iraq which was actually-according to well-documented inside sources,planned well before the events of 9/11.One of the predicted events -the attack against Iran,egged on by right wing interests,was supposedly stopped by Dubya as the US had yet to xtricate itself from Afghanistan and Iraq and the collapse of the US economy leading to the global eco-ccrisis put paid to that event.

A similar "invasion" immigant/refugees nto Austria in the early part of the last century was the catalyst for Adolf Hitler's racist views.We are witnessing today in Europ a similar intolerance of immigants/refugees who have swamped Euopean nations with the EU treaty and borderless states allowing for the refugees/immigrnts spreading all over. France is sitting ion a tinderbox with strong anti-Islmic feeling in evidence,so too are the stirrings o Neo-nazis in Germany where,as I said earlier,Hess's grave and remains have been removed as it was becmin a rallying point for extremists.With the licence to go after Islamic nations coming from the state (Libya,Iraq,Afghanistan) itself,is it any wonder that frustrated looney individuals,copy their example and as we have just seen so tragically and heart-rendingly in Norway,literally explode into action?

PS:One factor why we see so many looney acts in the west,patiicularly in the US is the fact that the gun culture is so prevalent,with the authorities either unwilling to impotent to do anything to curtail the easy access to guns and bomb making material.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17077
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Rahul M » 23 Jul 2011 23:33

philip boss, I have to disagree. even if we assume this guy is what he seems like he is, he does not draw inspiration from the bible or justify his actions by quoting st. whatever. that is the fundamental difference with islamist terrorism which is primarily religion driven. similarly, nazism does not fundamentally derive from the bible, but from racial theories constructed around a national sense of entitlement.
although a large number of catholics did support the persecution of jews nazism was not driven by christianity as its core principle.

similarly, bush might have been a rabid evangelist but the war on iraq was driven by commercial interests.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4839
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby sanjaykumar » 24 Jul 2011 02:38

I am always amused at how much contemporaneous Christianity can be explained away by appeal to eisegesis.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby JE Menon » 24 Jul 2011 04:07

>>There is nothing Chistian or Muslim with such terrorit entities and individuals,but a warped blinkered vision of their roots/religion etc.

In fundamental disagreement here boss. Certainly there is nothing that can be labelled as "Christian terrorism" in what this Norwegian lunatic has done. Information available so far does not suggest he planned it on Christian theological grounds, or that he executed the act using any religious atmospherics or war cries or anything like that, and again so far he has not justified it to the extent that we know in religious Christian terms. All we know so far is that he visited Christian fundamentalist website(s). Probably half the guys on BRF have done so, including me.

But this cannot be said about Islamic terrorists. They conceive the global and local terrorist activties entirely from an Islamic viewpoint, using specific doctrines, rituals and even terminologies. They execute the acts very often within clear religious constructs, using religion based operation names and using the cry Allah u Akbar before, for instance, detonating themselves or in the process of a fidayeen attack, and after the action, the terrorist act is almost always (I don't know of any exception, but there might be) justified in religious terms, referring to the Koran for explanations. This is a completely different animal.

Whether Islamic terrorism is somehow "worse" than random terrorism of the kind carried out by Christians, Hindus, Jews or Buddhists is a different discussion altogether. The problem of global terrorism that the world faces today is overwhelmingly Islamic, and the facts bear this out.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby brihaspati » 24 Jul 2011 04:11

symontk wrote:At present I am not aware of any issues in Norway by which one person can become a fundamentalist. I believe this is as same as the attacks that keep on happening over several school / university campuses in which students kill people indiscriminately for silly reasons. But there is a difference here that he has bombed a government building and killed scores of people in a resort


What is "fundamentalism" by the way?

Having said that, all christians including me is condemning this inhuman act. There is no justification whatsoever for any thing like this. Also one need to understand deeply how Christian structures are built and whether it promotes fundamentalistism. Serious soul searching has to be done to find this out

When one becomes a Christian, one has to become gentle too. If not I dont understand what Christianity is that.


How can a structure be built on an ideology that is incompatible or inconsistent with that ideology? The contradictions will show up immediately! Or of you say that the "deviation" started "later" than the inception of the ideology - during the transition stage - weren't the earlier "believers" protesting? if not - then why not? As for gentleness, are you sure that even the Roman emperor supervised heavy editing has still not left curious passages in the Gospels that suggest otherwise? :P


Regarding the crusades and Bush, there is one difference. During crusades, Pope promoted it, but for Bush he did oppose the move. It will be better for everyone if Western countries stop, acts of War for natural resources, financial colonalism, invasions, sanctions etc


Err..I am sure it was a "historical" oversight! As the sentence stands it may mean that "Bush" was around the time of the "historical" crusades! :D Would you clarify that you mean the Pope?

Are you suggesting that because "western countries" do all that, it is promoting "fundamentalism" (whatever that means) within western societies?

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby brihaspati » 24 Jul 2011 04:48

Philip wrote:I used the word "Christian" as "Islamist" teror has been so labelled.There is nothing Chistian or Muslim with such terrorit entities and individuals,but a warped blinkered vision of their roots/religion etc.,and intolerance towards other ethnic/religious groups leads them to contemplate such despicable acts.


Are you sure you can disconnect these ideologies and their cumulative claims from the interpretations of "intolerance"? This forum will not allow it - but I can bring up the textual and historical evidence - which are entirely consistent with such interpretations. In fact the entire history of the Church, all around the Med and further afield - right from the beginnings of the movement - is about intense sectarian violence and intolerance of the "other". How could they happen right from the beginning if the ideology "opposed" it or was incompatible with such "intolerance"?

The Bush analogy is an actual fact.A combination of neo-cons allied with the Christian right brought "Christain" Dubya into the Whiite House.What happened then?The invasion of Iraq which was actually-according to well-documented inside sources,planned well before the events of 9/11.One of the predicted events -the attack against Iran,egged on by right wing interests,was supposedly stopped by Dubya as the US had yet to xtricate itself from Afghanistan and Iraq and the collapse of the US economy leading to the global eco-ccrisis put paid to that event.


Historical moves happen because a lot of different streams of interests converge. What academic shortsightedness and hidden political inclinations of analysts does is to single out a subset of factors as the main driving one and reject the factors that gives counterexamples to their political beliefs. Thus neo-liberals [Arjun ji - not meant at you!] will highlight the "Christian-Right" aspect in the move against Iraq, neo-cons will highlight the civilizational "threat" from ME/Islamism, neo-Marxians [neither liberal nor con by definition] will highlight "economics" driving everything, in the vulgar-Marxist tradition. But they all play a role and each has bits of truth in it.

A similar "invasion" immigant/refugees nto Austria in the early part of the last century was the catalyst for Adolf Hitler's racist views.We are witnessing today in Europ a similar intolerance of immigants/refugees who have swamped Euopean nations with the EU treaty and borderless states allowing for the refugees/immigrnts spreading all over. France is sitting ion a tinderbox with strong anti-Islmic feeling in evidence,so too are the stirrings o Neo-nazis in Germany where,as I said earlier,Hess's grave and remains have been removed as it was becmin a rallying point for extremists.With the licence to go after Islamic nations coming from the state (Libya,Iraq,Afghanistan) itself,is it any wonder that frustrated looney individuals,copy their example and as we have just seen so tragically and heart-rendingly in Norway,literally explode into action?

PS:One factor why we see so many looney acts in the west,patiicularly in the US is the fact that the gun culture is so prevalent,with the authorities either unwilling to impotent to do anything to curtail the easy access to guns and bomb making material.


The "immigrant" theory behind Nazism - again just one of the many hypotheses, and not really supported or verified beyond doubts so far from documents or data that is available. Some extensive studies have occurred - especially on a certain list of Nazi party membership. But people become icons for movements that need not necessarily be exactly identical to what they actually stood for at their time. In fact Hess's grave would be very very non-iconic for a Nazi "revivalist" movement in its classic format, isn't it?

What I am wary of is the outburst of "looney" thats coming out again - being ascribed to "individuals"! :P I again see the tying up of moves against "Islamic/Islamist/Islamism" in ME, as having created the rise of so-called "fundamentalism". Is it not possible that it could be the other way round, or that a third factor - and not oil - [AFG and Paquis for example] that could drive both?

By the way, if gratuitous violence is enough to earn the epithet of "loony" - would not Maoists qualify en masse? Was Lenin not a loony? ["State and Revolution" should provide ample evidence!] In fact whoever recounted the the holiest text of Islam - would qualify too - isnt it, because more than one "sura" reco's violence on "pagans" for being just that - "pagans"? Or the many ahadiths on violence? But somehow I don't see application of "loony" on Marxians and Islamists generically - people whose ideologies specifically call for violent overthrow of states and regimes who do not obey their ideology, and specific coercive actions to repress their opponents?

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby brihaspati » 24 Jul 2011 05:31

I had the impression that "terrorism" happened because of perceptions of trauma and discrimination on "minority" opinion - whose sense of hurt is not adequately compensated for.

For example - all previous terror by Islamists on the subcontinent including that of say 1947, or the Kashmir valley Islamist atrocities in the late 80's, and earlier, previous to the destruction of the disputed structure at Ayodhya in the 90's, and all subsequent "terror" - was caused by the immense sense of hurt with the disputed structure incident.

So just one single incident can give rise to all past and future sense of trauma and justify all previous and future terror activities. In fact past terror can even anticipate future trauma and compensate itself for future hurt - like say 1947, or 60's, or 70's, or 80's Kashmir Valley Islamists anticipated the Ayodhya "trauma" of 90's. In some sense, because we are always asked to look at this historical sense of trauma, whenever there is a possibly Islamist-related terror incidence - does it not also ask us indirectly to consider that somehow such Islamist terror is also justified as some kind of natural justice? Just as the logic is applied for maoist terror? Or NSCN terror?

So why should we not also apply the same logic to this man who allegedly caused the Norway "terror", and seek to find out what sense of deprivation, or sense of trauma, or even anticipated future trauma - what sense of suppression of "minority voice" - what sense of insecurity motivated this person? Definitely his is a "minority" opinion too - isnt it?

If it is about intolerance of the presence of "aliens" - even that feeling is not always beyond acceptability, isnt it - and in India, the Kashmir Valley exclusivity has often been justified as a feeling of being "dispossessed" by non-Muslims and Indians in general. I know that only Islamists seem to be allowed this luxury of enjoying both the advantages of being the "majority" as well as the "minority" wherever they exist. In KV they can demand expulsion and can commit genocide of KP becuase they are the "majority" and we must respect "democratic"=="majority wishes" onlee in Islamist case. Elsewhere they can demand exclusivity because they are the "minority" and we must respect "minority" sentiments because "democracy" NOT == "majority wishes" whenever that majority is not Islamist.

So both as "minority" opinion of "intolerant Christian Right" as well as member of the "majority" ethnicity - should we not extend the same elaborate logical justifications that we extend to Islamists and Maoists - to him? Or he does not have the benefit because he is not an Islamist and not a Maoist?

What if I pose a counter-hypothesis - that such "fundamentalism" is a reaction to the failure of western regimes to contain Islamism, and in fact showed signs of hobnobbing more with Islamist trended countries like Turkey, and gone distinctly pro-Palestinian-Islamism - and that Islamism which has openly declared ambitions of bringing Europe one day under the Sharia and under Islam?

If you fail to condemn the intolerance of Islamist societies towards the "outsider", if you fail to condemn the religious dogma that claims the right to exclusivism from Islam, if you can do nothing to tackle Islam inspired terror on all and sundry, and you still shake hands with Islamist govs and regimes and help prop up and protect or legitimize terrorists like Hamas - on what ethical or logical basis will you be able to condemn this man?

I am not a supporter of white[and/or]Christian supremacists, for they hate my people for their colour/belief/origins as much as they do the Muslim,Iraqi/Irani. But you cannot tackle them by appeasing Islam - among your own, or in regions "exlcusivised" by Islam. There cannot be selective silence and inaction and worse, pretension and deliberate deceptive whitewashing on exclusive ideologies.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby CRamS » 24 Jul 2011 05:46

Its not OK to go and kill anyone one doesn't like, but this dude hates evertybody else including Muslims, but then goes and slaughters his own inncoent lily white countrymen. Can't fathom his twisted mind.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby brihaspati » 24 Jul 2011 05:52

I think people should not confuse "radicalism" as "fundamentalism". Christianity - before its usurpation by the empire as an imperial ideology - was very much a radical and possibly political ideology and movement. This element has remained within the Christian tradition throughout the ages, fueled factional infighting and polemical battles over essentially political positions - and both the conservative as well as the radical position has remained in constant battle within Christianity.

Interpreting it as "gentleness" is the pro-state position, the semi-imperial position. Whereas, the "radical" memes have always supported the "activists". The radical aspect is also used by leaders/factions within the Church and state when needed. Luther's movement and its initial success or connections to the collateral "peasant uprisings" have been extensively studied - also how Luther changed tack afterwards.

It is this radicalism aspect that has given to various streams of "liberation theology" that have sometimes found fellow-travelers in Marxists and maoists. I think we need to go beyond the standard "imperialist" representation which seeks to subordinate the radicalism towards its own interests and stability and only against obstacles or opponents of imperialism. I will see if some of the material I came across in my own researches can be posted.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby brihaspati » 24 Jul 2011 05:54

CRamS wrote:Its not OK to go and kill anyone one doesn't like, but this dude hates evertybody else including Muslims, but then goes and slaughters his own inncoent lily white countrymen. Can't fathom his twisted mind.

Its the same logic that drives AFPakis to slaughter their own.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby symontk » 24 Jul 2011 06:42

I will define fundamentalism thus:

All people are created equal and children of God. But the way people behave and interact give way for differences. A christian is only supposed to be aware, show & communicate the difference to another party. But if it goes beyond that and he / she does try to do some actions like sanctions, war, violence, reservations, apartheid, discrimination etc then it becomes fundamentalism

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby brihaspati » 24 Jul 2011 06:48

Why do you call that "fundamental-ism"? That implies that all those aspects are a core "issue" of the ideology concerned. Fundamental - basic-core-essential-root. Inherent - there is a subconscious acknowledgment that all these aspects were there in the past, and had been so much so an essential part of the ideology - that going back to them or reviving them is somewhat like going back to the essence or the "fundamental".

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Manny » 24 Jul 2011 06:49

Who says there is no Christian fundamentalism?

The impetus of the whole Holocaust was because of Martin Luther the founder of the Protestant movement and his anti semticism rant which Hitler swallowed wholesale along with the entire German and Europe in general.

Just Wiki search for "Blood Libel". Just read about it. The horror of this torture for two thousand years in persecuting a small tribe of people because they would not convert to Christianity.

The desire to convert has not diminished one bit. They are running all over India with their Cross Planting... with in your face Christianity. And look what is happening in the North East India when Southern Baptists went there.

But I should note, this is a minority of Christians. The two evangelical groups that are almost terrorists IMO, are the Southern Baptists Evangelicals and Pentecostals. These are the groups who are giving the the majority of Christians a bad name. But still these are very influential groups. ..with the "Joshua Project" to culturally cleanse the world with their conversion efforts.

This Norwegian dude is a product of that bigoted mind set.

These fundamentalists are the ones spreading hatred against Hindus and Muslims and others in the west. It is a hate group not very different from the neo Nazies. Racial Supremacy and Religious supremacy originates from the same Bible Belt here in the US.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby symontk » 24 Jul 2011 07:14

The "core" in Christianity cannot be be understood just by scriptures (truth). There is also way and the life. If you dislike others for being different, its just being unchristian and thats fundamentatlism since you adhere to truth (fundamental) in a incomplete sense (still not fully christian). The way and life also need to be correct to be christian

Its not enough that you know truth and want others to follow it. You also need to be an example in your life and thus show the way. If not, its not complete

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby brihaspati » 24 Jul 2011 07:40

symontk wrote:The "core" in Christianity cannot be be understood just by scriptures (truth). There is also way and the life. If you dislike others for being different, its just being unchristian and thats fundamentatlism since you adhere to truth (fundamental) in a incomplete sense (still not fully christian). The way and life also need to be correct to be christian

Its not enough that you know truth and want others to follow it. You also need to be an example in your life and thus show the way. If not, its not complete


We better not go into this! It will lead to theological intricacies not really appropriate for the forum. But what you write shows the classical problem in Christianity. Texts are the basis of "truth" - because the entire legitimacy is based on one single historical event, the ministry and his "crucifixion", and what he revealed during that period, so any "Christian" is basically tied to that textual narration of the event [there is no other direct contact except "miraculous" appearances/inner "voices" and visions] as a fundamental basis of his/her belief. But then that "text" is also claimed not to be enough - and there is supposedly a way of "life/practice" over and above what is claimed in the text.

But problem is that in the intervening time-space continuity of "way of life" cannot be proved. There were many strands of early Christianity - much of which has been actively sought to be purged away, with evidence that even clerics officially or overtly obeyed but secretly resented and did not agree. Which means not everyone agreed about the way-of-life for a large part of the formative centuries? Whose way of life was the "only" "true one"? Was Arrian wrong and the Goths who followed him wrong in their way of life? Whose way of life was handed down to posterity as the Christian way of life under Constantine and his eager-for-power bishop - some three centuries later than the events claimed in the narrative? Even then the iconodule-iconoclast conflict lasted until the end of the 800's. Were the Paulician's the right way of lifers? Or their persecutors? What about the various factions that went on surviving around Europe and ME? Nestorians had a wrong way of life? How do we know that what is being claimed as the right way of life is there in an unbroken chain from the Nazarene [the only way he is described - if at all, in contemporary records]?

This problem, especially with "violence" in the New Testament is a long and thorny one. That the question was never really settled, is proved by the long polemical debates within the Church about this, and the scattered references to apparent endorsement of violence residing side by side with "obvious" peaceful gestures - persisting through all those debates. The texts cannot be wished away and rejected - simply because they have items we do not wish to be public now since they contradict the image wish to have, because only by retaining the undesired parts - and checking them out against actual historical record of Church as well as individual activist/theologian induced/supported/promoted violence, can we make sense of what really happened.

Without the narrative reference, the actual military-political struggles in which those narratives formed, and the role those narratives played in motivation of violence - as well as how violence shaped the narrative - we cannot understand the radicalism that is a core part of Christianity.

By focusing only on the imperialist overlay of "submission" to the authorities, and peaceful "acceptance" - we fail to see the totality of the movement and its ideology, and would continue to be surprised as to how it can inspire violent activism.

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Manny » 24 Jul 2011 07:57

symontk wrote:The "core" in Christianity cannot be be understood just by scriptures (truth). There is also way and the life. If you dislike others for being different, its just being unchristian and thats fundamentatlism since you adhere to truth (fundamental) in a incomplete sense (still not fully christian). The way and life also need to be correct to be christian

Its not enough that you know truth and want others to follow it. You also need to be an example in your life and thus show the way. If not, its not complete



Truth means, a factual statement, with proof and evidence. Which Christianity is not. Christianity is faith just like all other "faiths" including the belief in Voodoo. All beliefs to be given the same "respect" and/or accommodation by civic society without adjudication as to which one is first among equals.. Just because someone spams a millions time that its "the truth" does not make it one. In fact, by insisting its its the "truth", it becomes mischief.

"No one will deny or dispute the power of the Almighty to make such a communication if he pleases. But admitting, for the sake of a case, that something has been revealed to a certain person, and not revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. When he tells it to a second person, a second to a third, a third to a fourth, and so on, it ceases to be a revelation to all those persons. It is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and, consequently, they are not obliged to believe it." = T.Paine
Last edited by Manny on 24 Jul 2011 08:03, edited 1 time in total.

Theo_Fidel

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Theo_Fidel » 24 Jul 2011 08:03

brihaspati wrote:Its the same logic that drives AFPakis to slaughter their own.


This is not correct.

Extreme Biblical literals believe liberals as protecting and creating the problem of multi-culturalism. They wish to reverse immigration, all kinds.

Also doesn't matter what book says choice is ours. During civil war both pro & anti-slavery used Bible as evidence for righteousness of their way. This too was truth.

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Manny » 24 Jul 2011 08:54

BTW.. the Time of India has a opening page with "Religious Right terrorist" as the cause of the Danish terror. It did not say "Christian religious right terrorist". The "Christian" part is left out. Cause in India, the leftists want to take a pot shot at Hindu conservatives. Like, "Liberal leftsts" are good and "religious right" means bad.

Never mind the fact that the "Christian religious Right" of India are part and parcel of the Indian leftists.

Pffft!

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: "Christian" Fundamentalism in West

Postby Arjun » 24 Jul 2011 09:20

What did the Oslo Killer want

Good article that throws more light on the motivations of the madman. He was indeed influenced by Christianist ideas...and regarded himself as a Knights Templar..one of the leading military units in the Crusades.

Besides the tragedy of 90 totally senseless deaths - this guy might also pose a huge setback to the gains of David Cameron's 'muscular liberalism' policy in the UK and Europe in general. The concept of multi-culturalism was waning in popularity in Europe - but this guy's lunacy provides enough grist to the defenders of multi-culturalism in Europe and India to portray the opposition as murderous fanatics.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests