Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8
th, 2012 at 6:32am:
Grey wrote on Oct 7
th, 2012 at 8:57pm:
The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps.
Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion.
SOB
Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'.
That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance.
That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all.
All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers.
It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE.
But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting.