Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Politically, what do you consider yourself as?

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by punkdude, Aug 27, 2009.

  1. jambo1

    jambo1Member New Member


    9

    0

    0

    Oct 23, 2009
     
    anarcho-communist. is there any other kind or are the rest just poor imitations!!!!??
     
  2. rE sIs Tanz

    rE sIs TanzActive Member Forum Member


    31

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     
    The big threes?
    You mean Judaism, Christianity and Islam?
    What is Judaism?
    There are many different definitions today. Even the ultimate racist state Israel, a rogue state created by ethnic cleansing, claims to be a Jewish state where on the other side Orthodox Jews speak out their mourning of the existence of the state Israel.
    So, who is Jew and what is Jewish? It differs from the angle one looks from. To list up all "different point of views" is impossible and senseless.

    What is the "holy scripture" of Jews?
    The "Torah" has somehow turned into the "Testament".
    I do not know about any certain written recordings of the revelations to prophet Moses which are still kept somewhere and are indeed the reflection of the words of Moses he received by melek Cebrail ( i do not use the phrase archangel gabriel here because that will cause you associating something different in your mind than what the meaning of it is, the state of existence of "angels" and all other creatures is all properly described and defined in the Quran ). I haven't done any intensive research on Judaism and Jews and the Torah.
    The Hebrew holy scripture (whatever that was-remaining from the revelation to prophet Moses) was translated into Greek between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC in Alexandria. And what is the Bible? The teaching of Christiany, it is a transformation of the so called Jewish Torah and additional texts of people who claim to be apostles of prophet Isa (i do not use here christ or jesus because this will cause you associating again something different than of what the meaning of it is) blablablablablablablabla!!!!!!

    Islam has NOTHING in common with that sick doctrine of Christiany which is claimed to be the doctrine of a so called prophet called Jesus Christ who was crucified and blablablablabla bullshit.
    Even the "god" is not the same in Christianity and Islam.
    It is true that there are some similarities in the telling of incidences and events that took place in history in the region of the Middle East, but they do also quite differ from each other as far as I know. I haven't read the suckin bible and won't spend any fuckin time on reading it or studying it cause I am not interested to be specialised in religions or something.

    Islam does accept all prophets which have lived thoughout history as the prophets of Islam whethere these prophets have been succesful or not in delivering the message of Allah. It is said that there were hundreds, thousands of prophets throughout the history of human kind, which started according to the Quran with Adem (Adam). He was the first prophet. And I personally believe he was the creature in history who had managed to transform his thinking process into a language, into a systematic structure based on logical operations which he was then able to express through sounds. This is described in the Quran as the process of "teaching Allah Adam the name of things".
    I have studied translatology and a bit of linguistics and this thesis that language came into forth by mere coincidence and arbitrary seems quite absurd to me. You can imagine some humanic beings who are growling and screaming or something alike and then suddenly one of them says "hey, this sounds really cool, we use the baba for father" or something like this. this is not possible!

    whatever!

    I do not believe Allah has created the earth and human blablabla. I believe Allah created existence, and then existence continued to evolve in a certain way. In other words Allah just created and then sowed the seed of existence and sometimes just adds some fertilizer.

    It sounds so fuckin bizarre! Yeah! Bizarre and flies in the face of not only obvious religious doctrine but also impartial independent analysis! You're right! Ok!

    I do not want to fuckin talk about this now. I am not a fuckin theologian!
    I just use my own fuckin mind to understand the Quran.
    I was an atheist for a quite long while in my life, I was born into a Christian society, I dived into a Muslim society which lives absolutely NOT the teachings of Islam but practises a mere traditional understanding of a religion called "Islam". And believe me most of those "Muslims" would not consider me as a Muslim!
    I just do not give a fuck about anyone's thought about me! I'm doing the right thing, that's what I believe in and I feel happy being an anarchist Muslim
    !
    Fuckin relax!
    Here, enjoy it and smile....:
    http://video.sezgiler.com/dini/avustral ... ayesi.html

    OI!OI!OI! :ecouteurs:
     
  3. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    Wow.... then this is not better than the christians theory about creationism.... Another thing that has nothing to do with anarchism

    and you still wonder what all religion have in common ?!?

    Religions are only here because human's nature require to find answers to existential questions, like why we are here, who created the universe, what happens after death, etc.... And ALL religious bullshit provide an answer to all those questions which scientifically remains without answer...

    So you admit you can't even give an explaination to all questions but you persist to say that "you are doing the right thing" and that "you don't care about anyone's thought"

    Yes because they are all way too endoctrinated and they brainwash everyone. There is a lot of islamist states where you are brainwashed with religious theories as soon as you are born, you grow up and you live your whole life while being brainwashed. If you lived there, you would probably be too. Because there, it's just normality.

    So... what do you think about islamist states ?

    Separation of religion and politics is one of the most important things for a serious objectivity. Christians began to understand it, but obviously you don't. It would be easier to swallow your beliefs if you introduced yourself as an "anarchist" and not an "anarcho-mudjaeejen-whatever"

    I thought anarchism was also about accepting to question everything, including yourself.... not?


    I'd still like to know more about your weird projects of mixing anarchism with a religious dogma :
    In your anarcho-islamist society, would women be free and would i be allowed to eat pork ?
    Would i also be allowed to insult your prophet and make carricatures of him or would you throw rocks at me ??
    And what if a majority of peoples would want something that would be against islam laws ??
    Would you face the truth and accept that a majority of peoples want it or would you just declare the war to the majority and claim they are traitors and infidels ??
     
  4. rE sIs Tanz

    rE sIs TanzActive Member Forum Member


    31

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     

    Have a good night. Or day? I don't know where you are on earth?
    "Why the fuck should I ever ask myself why and how this earth was created? Why the fuck should I ever ask myslef why I am being? Heh?! I am nonsense! I am shit! OK! Just forget it!
    You smoke grass? Go and have a joint and relax a bit!
    :ecouteurs:

    have a good time and be good!
     
  5. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,341

    6

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 43 years old
    Long Beach CA United States

    This is your response to some serious questions posed that I would actually like to hear your response on? real mature.

    -the anxietist
     
  6. Rabbit

    RabbitExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    203

    0

    0

    Oct 26, 2009
     
    @rE sIs Tanz:
    Please answer this. It is a legitimate question to what you have brought up.

    Also, your critiques of Judaism and Christianity are unfair. I won't touch what you said about Israel, but your view of Judaism seems tainted by blind anti-Zionism.
    Your criticism of Christianity makes no sense. First you talk shit about Jesus. As an atheist, this is fine by me and I agree to an extent. But then you talk about accepting all prophets. Jesus is a prophet in Islam. Not a "son of God" but a prophet nonetheless.

    By the end of your post I felt like I knew the tenets of your religion better than you did.
     
  7. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    Wow.... Are we having a debate or we are not ?? You bring up a lot of arguments but can't back up any of them...




    I just realized i forgot to read a whole page of replys:

    We are talking about the origins of anarchism because the subject is what is contradictory and what not.

    If i said i was a black nazi, what would you answer me ? That the men behind nazism and fascism were racists and against black peoples. Because if we want to make an objective analys of something and make a global opinion of it, we must go back to the origins.




    And why should we not fight religious propaganda ? It is in the nature of any anarchists to fight brainwashing and exploitation, and religion is one of the biggest symbol of it.

    Religion is like power. As soon as it exists, you can't control it and you can't plan what will happen. And this is why religions like christianism have made so many deaths.

    As for "no god no masters" do you know where it comes ? It's from Augusto Blanqui who was not only against god but also against ANY FORM OF RELIGION. Please don't deform slogans.

    Yeah sure.

    It's so much easier to find an explaination in religion for something you don,t understand.

    talking about NDE. When you are dying, you see a white tunnel. Yep, it has been scientifically proven. Anybody would go and say OMG THIS IS THE PROOF THERE IS SOMETHING AFTER LIFE.

    No. It's just because you are dying, your eyes are dying and you are becomming blind. Which gives the impression of a white tunnel. It has been scientifically proven.

    As for psychedelic trips, when i take a big dose of LSD i can see god, too.


    Because anarchists base their ideas on FACTS and materialism, not on fiction.


    How can you affirmate that jesus existed? A lot of serious scientifists have proven that this is bullshit and that he never existed, especially anarchists...

    We can't have a serious debate if you quote religious propaganda.


    because anarchism is not only the abolishment of the state.

    Anarcho-capitalists want to abolish the state too, but they are WAY different of leftish anarchists. Same for marxists. Same for national-anarchists. And same thing for a lot of bullshit ideas...

    What weakens the movement is the peoples who are willing to make concesions with their basic ideas to collaborate with opposing ideas inside the same movement.

    I thought everyone was free to believe what they want to ?

    I repeat it: Original anarchism is atheist anarchism.

    This is the same debate with anarcho-capitalists who pretend they are real anarchists. THEY ARE NOT. They don't have any historical proof to back their bullshit on. Just like the anarcho-christians.

    And yes, obviously there IS an anarchist consensus since the VAST MAJORITY of anarchists since the last 2 centurys are atheists.

    Based on what bakunin said, on what malatesta said, on what voline said, on what Louise Michel said, on what proudhon said, on what élisée reclus said, on what

    It is a fact that a vast majority of anarchists are atheists, since the begginning. And i'm not even talking about spanish 1936, kronsdadt, ukraine makhnovtchina, ezln, .... Nothing to do with religion.


    Ok but we aren't in an anarchist society yet, are we?

    So basically you are saying anarchism can be interpreted by any ways, and that no one have the right to protest. I suppose you also consider peoples like the national autonomous movement in germany as real anarchists.... They are nazi with red and black flag who like black block and anarchism esthetic.... So what about them ? We can't critize them or else we are a "club anarchy" ?

    It would be funny to see a revolution with anarcho-nationalists, anarcho-christians, anarcho-sionists, anarcho-capitalists, and anarchocommunists...... but it will be without me

    I agree we should not be elitists and accept all form of real anarchism even if they are not all the same (i'm talking about synthesists, platformists, collectivists, mutuellists, anarchocommunists) BUT i exclude religion and capitalism. I am an anarcho-synthesist, but i am also radically anti-capitalist and atheist.
     
  8. Link K2B

    Link K2BExperienced Member Experienced member


    69

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     
    You have every right to be so, but you do not have the right to say that all anarchists must think this way, which is what you're doing.

    You've said three times 'Anarchism is...' or 'Anarchists are...' but neither you, nor Bakunin, nor Proudhon, nor any anarchist majority can define what thinking constitutes as anarchist and which doesn't. It's simply not up to you to decide.

    Your first example is extreme but I'll give you my own take on it. If people wanted to create a neo-nazi society, and have a hierarchy of militarised generals and not allow any non-arian people to join their community, they would have a right to do so in their own little pocket of the country where it did not bother anyone else. So long as they kept to themselves, did not oppress anyone or hog any natural resources, it's not hurting anyone. The second they started doing any of these things, such as becoming expansionist, they would negate their right to tolerance. Many would question whether fascist societies could ever be capable of not lookin to conquer and oppress peoples and they might have a point, but assuming they didn't, I would have no problem with them.

    You exclude yourself from any revolution involving religious people, those with different economic notions of anarchism and, it's starting to appear, anyone with values radically differing from your own. Well, any revolution you do ascribe would seem to be a very small one indeed, perhaps one consisting solely of you.
     
  9. GFSM

    GFSMExperienced Member Experienced member


    92

    0

    1

    Oct 25, 2009
     
    i can't be bothered with the quote function. i find it hard to use with multiple quotes.

    re: jesus christ:

    it's pretty much proven the guy didn't exist, at least as described in the bible etc. the budding imperialist romans, and their jewish subjects, were both very adept in birth records. no child born as "jesus" (a common name) was born in bethlehem (sp?) around that time. not in a barn. not in a squat either. the place was very small. "christ" is a title, not a name.

    i don't want to give fuel to the so called "anarcho-christians" out there, but i do like this story for it's poetic value. if a religious cult leader, lets say one called by others "jesus christ", walked on water (thus performing a "miracle") there may be a historical truthism to the tale. there was a private roman pier named "water", and if a radicalised cultist walked out onto private property of the empire, it would have been considered a miracle because he flew in the face of authority. a collection of these kind of random stories could have been gathered, edited, and finally a persona developed of a fictional protagonist, giving birth to the origins of the new testament. this does sound highly likely in my opinion.

    re: black nazis:

    there are plenty. hitler was an occultist, and a reader of blavatsky, the creator of the modern theosophical movement, much of the doctrine of which is based around hinduism. this is also why he used the hindu/buddhist swastika/svastika. in occult doctrine the aryan race isn't "blonde, blue eyed, white folk", the aryan is the 4th root race of the world, and includes all minerals, plants, and animals (including humans) that exist on it. prior to the 4th root race was the "atlanteans" (the 3rd root race, the word atlantean deliberately chosen for it's mythological overtones) and the "lemurians" (the 2nd root race, the name taken from darwinist theory of all things!). again, all this is merely occultist philosophical musings. anyway, the 2nd and 3rd races both had global societies, which were destroyed by catastrophic upheavals, such as great floods and continental realignment. thus "atlantis" wasn't a place, it was a time in the earth's history according to this belief system.
    so hitler mixed up this doctrine with his own kinky fetishism, and called his "master race" aryan, a sanskrit word. he wanted to "perfect" the 4th root race before the next upheaval, when the world realigns and "we" become the 5th root race. you'd be surprised, but there's plenty of room for the "hypocrisy" of "black nazis" in even hitlers corrupted version of theosophy. there's maori biker gangs in new zealand whose jackets and wheels are covered in "nazi" symbology. and i've met black "nazis" before.

    hitler might have been sick and twisted, but he certainly wasn't stupid. and anyone who hasn't done their research into why a white supremacist would use hindu symbols and sanskrit words in his philosophy is arguably of less intelligence that the most famous psychopath of modern times.

    know your enemies, and you need never fear them.
     
  10. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    So you agree that nazi-anarchists and other garbages like that are true anarchists.... Fine. I'll stop wasting my time argueing on this.

    ok.... so i can be an anarchist, hail hitler, open gas chambers, make a totalitarian state, oppress all women.... and still be a true anarchist ?

    Awesome, so you don't give a fuck until it comes in your town...

    This reminds me a old jew who survived to the holocaust and who said "first they came for the communists, then they came for the socialists, then they came for the anarchists, and then.... they came for me but there was nobody left to protest"

    Why the fuck should we give freedom to the peoples who want to destroy it ? You think it would be a safe place to live, in a country where half of the peoples will want to kill you if you are an anarchist.... or maybe you want some kind of berlin's wall again ??

    I want to exclude myself from any revolution involving RELIGION, not religious people.

    It is better to organize with peoples having same economic notions since this is what makes the real big difference. Anarcho-communism is way different than marxism or anarcho-capitalism....

    But i would have less problems doing things with these peoples than accepting fascists and neonazis...............


    hahahaha sorry but you have absolutly no idea of what you are talking about...

    All revolutions in the History went exactly the way i described it. There was no religion, no anarchocapitalism, no fascists living in peace with the anarchist, nothing of all you have mentionned.

    Find me only ONE single historical event to back your argument on and then we will see.........


    Edit: btw i hope i dont offense any of you... we are only debating and i only want to express my opinion ! I don't hate any of you nor do i consider you as ennemies !
     
  11. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,341

    6

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 43 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    Ok, fair enough, but how would u handle religion in builiding a new society? Prohibit it? or let people have the freedom to do as they wish as long as it does not interfere with others? If you choose to prohibit it absolutely, then I for one would not be joining you.

    -the anxietist
     
  12. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    It's not what "i" want, it's what the collectivity want. Asking myself what "i" would do is placing me in the position like if i was a dictator taking the decision for everyone else !

    The revolution I believe in will never be imposed to the peoples.

    But if we were to decide what to do with religion, i'd suggest we use all the money spent in chruches and invest it on other place where it is most needed. I'd say fuck the christian church and the whole religion. And peoples should use their time and energy in communautarian projects instead of wasting their time hearing the bullshit of some priest who doesnt even represent god....

    But i'd also say that the revolutionnaries must not play the role of the "police of the thought". I don't care what peoples believe in, except when it takes a preponderent place in society and get as much influence as it have right now. I'd agree with your slogan "let them live but limit their actions" for this particuliar case, but only once we have got rid of the religious hierarchy and the churches

    What i was saying is that i would refuse to get involved in an anarchist society that support religion. It is a big part of the system that MUST be abolished if we want to totally get rid of the state. Remember the picture of the pyramid of capitalism ? Religion at the top.


    I still wonder how anarchists can believe in something based on a 2000 years old book who we are not even sure where it comes from and who really wrote it... These same anarchists are often the same ones who will always question the government and the official truth but they don't care if they are believing in something even if there is absolutly no proof.... and even if there is more probability god and jesus never existed...

    And one of the most important thing of libertarian education system is to teach an alternative point of view. This is where the real change will come, at long-term. If peoples are still so easily fooled by religious stories it's because it has taken a big place in our society.
     
  13. Link K2B

    Link K2BExperienced Member Experienced member


    69

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     
    The Swatstika was actually Jainist but that's all very interesting stuff nonetheless.

    Ungovernable:
    I don't know if you're misunderstanding or misrepresenting me so let me clarify.

    "So long as they kept to themselves, did not oppress anyone or hog any natural resources, it's not hurting anyone. The second they started doing any of these things, such as becoming expansionist, they would negate their right to tolerance."

    Do you understand that? Practising their beliefs in the midst of like-minded people so long as they don't extend it to beyond that boundary. Killing people in gas chambers would definitely constitute as having crossed that boundary, btw. Preparing to would also, it would provoke a reaction similar to the way in which people feel about Iran's nuclear proliferation and, hypothetically, should be utterly condemned and stopped in its tracks.

    If you interpret this as me wantin to watch idley by as nazis establish a new reich, I'll just ignore it because that's clearly not what I'm sayin.

    That's a good start then. In every movement, you'll ave different factions becomin involved tryin to pursue their own agenda. The difference with anarchism bein that there is actually a place for most ideologies within it with the exception of domination. With that in mind, it's fair to say neonazis and fascists would probably want nothin to do with it anyway.


    I can appreciate where you're comin from on a lot of issues but what's puttin people's backs up is tellin them what anarchism is and that their beliefs do not belong in it. There's better ways to communicate you disagree with the stance they're takin, your last post was a lot better in this respect :)
     
  14. GFSM

    GFSMExperienced Member Experienced member


    92

    0

    1

    Oct 25, 2009
     
    i could go on a rant about how the swastika neither belongs to hinduism or jainism but this isn't the place. i wrote what i did as a gross simplification. this thread is so "revolutionary", as in it just ends up repeating itself over and over again. i'm gonna go watch some paint dry for a while, it's getting boring here.
     
  15. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,341

    6

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 43 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    Yup that would be what religious folk call FAITH. And there is nothing wrong with that. It's no different then one having FAITH in themselves to make a change, sometimes when all rationality dictates otherwise... but i risk sounding evangelical, so i'll stop before that happens :)

    -the anxietist
     
  16. Link K2B

    Link K2BExperienced Member Experienced member


    69

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     
    Wasn't tryin to upset you mate, just offered what I thought was a correction. If it's inaccurate I'd love to hear more about the origins of it, I think Eastern religion is fascinatin.
     
  17. rE sIs Tanz

    rE sIs TanzActive Member Forum Member


    31

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     
    I have never said this was my response to those questions. This was my response to the submission of this unsympathetic person, I felt like writing this when I wrote it and then clicked the submit button. Sorry, for being so "childish".....I am not so mature like you! :ecouteurs:
     
  18. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,341

    6

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male, 43 years old
    Long Beach CA United States
    Please i take to pride in maturity... it happens with age :p

    but seriously, i would like to hear your opinions on those questions that he posted.

    -the anxietist
     
  19. rE sIs Tanz

    rE sIs TanzActive Member Forum Member


    31

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     
    I've gone through the replies and actually started to write a response to any question but this won't go anywhere.

    We do not speak the same language. The words used have different definitions in your worlds and different in mine.
    We first of all would have to agree on them before we can have a conversation.
    If white means white to me but black to you, I can write an encyclopaedia on colours but you won't still get it cause in any sentence I use the word white you'll perceive it as black and comprehend the opposite of what I say.
    And this is exactly happening here.
    I am understanding you, because I am also aware of the language you speak but you do not know my language and I do not want to teach you it, I do not want to empose anything on you.

    Maybe we should start first with "religion".
    What is religion?
    The etymological root of religion is relegere or/and religare is what I read.
    Do we agree on this?
    What does it mean?
    Where does it come from?
    The evolution of the word lego to religio (?):

    1.I choose, select, appoint
    2.I collect, gather, bring together
    3.I take, steal
    4.I traverse, pass through
    5.I read (aloud), recite

    1.I despatch, send as ambassador
    2.I deputize

    1.Ι lay down, put to sleep
    2.I put in order, arrange, gather
    3.I choose, count, reckon
    4.I say, speak, converse, tell a story

    1.(transitive) to bind or tie
    2.(transitive) to unite
    3.(transitive) to connect
    4.(intransitive) to get on (with someone)
    5.(intransitive) To alloy

    1.scrupulousness, conscientious exactness
    2.religious scruple, religious awe, superstition, strict religious observance
    3.scruples, conscientiousness
    4.(of gods) sanctity
    5.an object of worship, holy thing, holy place

    Was there first religion and the word fit it, or did this word evolve into the term "religion".

    Blablablablablabla!!!
    So, even anarchism could be considered as a religion? According to the etymological root of thw word yes, but not according to the use of the word, contemporarily.
    This is why I do not like to use the word religion, it can have thousand meanings!

    Is Islam a religion?
    No.
    Islam is a din.
    Din comes from the Arabic word deyn.
    deyn: responsibility, an obligation you have to take

    We do not choose Islam, it is programmed into our being.
    Living Islam (practising a life in accordance with the guiding of the Quran) is the choice of the right decoding process of the code Allah has embedded in our existence.
    A flower lives this for itself. A star lives this for itself. A raindrop lives this for itself. A dog lives this for itself. A rock lives this for itself. A cell lives this for itself. They do not chose which decoding process they prefer, they are programmed with only one option, they do only obey Allah in their existence itself.
    The human being is programmed with two options. You either obey Allah or any other "god".
    Obeying Allah means accepting to have been created by Allah with the purpose to only obey Allah.
    This is not easy at all, and to live this consciousness in a constant way is impossible.
    So, you try to shape your life as much as possible with the continous consciousness to only obey Allah, this is why you are called five times for salad (not salad to eat - for the "praying"), to remember to not obey anything than Allah.

    The teachings in the Quran are the guidance of how a human being can manage this, only obeying Allah.

    Ok, let's get to anarchy.
    Anarchy from Greek: ἀναρχία anarchía, "without ruler"
    "No rulership or enforced authority."

    If I only accept Allah's guide as my guidance and do not "worship" any god and do not submit myself to any form of -ism or -si or -logy it means for me I do not accept any form of institution or teachings "created" by anyone as my "ideology".
    I do not accept any authority neither in form of a human being or an establishment, foundation etc. as an authority I would have to submit myself or/and would have to obey.
    The prophet Muhammed is only the leader. He is not a person to worship. But due to the extensive influence of Christianity in Islam (especially in the Ottoman Empire) and the potential of the human to be manipulated very easily his figure has become for most of the Muslims as a figure to "worship".
    The prophet's duty is only to deliver the message of Allah but not to rule over the people.
    The society of very early Islam consists of small communities, society in Islam is based on the "fundamental" of "the family". The imam (leader, ruler) of each community is the father in the family (can be also the grand or grand grandfather). Muhammed is a person people visit and ask for advices, He also is the spokesman of his community and the leader of the army.
    But there was never existing an "Islamic State" of which he was the leader of.

    We can continue later.
    I am really having difficulties with chosing the right words and what I should tell you about Islam, so that you would get the link between Anarchy (what it means to me) and Islam (what it is-how it is defined in the Quran). But I have friends who also see a link between Islam and Anarchy, Anarchy as an alternative state of definition in the Western world for the modell of a society.

    What is in reality and what is in Islam hidden might not be seeming to be matching. You're right.

    But what I am certain about is that a society consisting of Anarchists would be able to live Anarchy within a true Muslim society, I do not say state because Islam rejects any form of state like the existing forms of states which are existing.

    The first verses of the Quran are dealing about the structure of social justice and instruct the struggle against social unjustice, acutally capitalism.

    Blablablablabla!!!!
     
  20. rE sIs Tanz

    rE sIs TanzActive Member Forum Member


    31

    0

    0

    Oct 27, 2009
     

    which question?

    I do not want to communicate with this person actually. He talks like Georg Bush! Bush's administration and the other Illuminati asslickers consider them as terrorists! Hamas I am talking about.
     
Loading...