No, certainly not. It's more akin to holocaust denial than holocaust promotion. — unenlightened

Certainly not? That's your answer?

OK. :chin:

What holocaust is he denying here?

Again, where is the malevolence?

I think your problem is simply that you are too much interpreting what Scruton is saying and trying to find some subtle and hidden agenda that is malevolent or something.

It's like if I start to talk about the active measures that Putin's Russia does, means that I would be a russophobe. And perhaps, as the only existing political narrative seems to be the US narrative, that I even start to speak about it I has to be that I am an offended liberal Hillary-voter that clings on to the Trump-Russia connection. Even if I wouldn't be talking about it. (That I come from a country that naturally has long been influenced by Russia simply because of geography wouldn't be the reason. And that I like Russians, have been there, now Russian and love especially their cuisine and culture doesn't matter either.)

I am focusing very narrowly on a couple of things here, but I am not alone in my criticism, and this is not a new criticism of Scruton. So my own dementia is not really a factor. My arguments and complaints are mirrored by others citing other things he has said at other times. — unenlightened

Yes, indeed there are many others.

Now I don't want to sound harsh and I do value your comments, but I think that you are showing the symptoms of the creeping political tribalism. When this tribalism takes hold, we don't even listen anymore to what actually the other side says, but just try to interpret in the worst possible way. He must have meant this, because he is on the opposite side as me. And this is an universal phenomenon.

So where can Scruton be wrong?

Well, is it indeed that 'islamophobia' was invented by the Muslim Brotherhood is a question that we do have a chance of finding an objective yes or no answer. He maybe wrong with that.

the wiki list I linked constitutes a real persecution of Islam, not an invention, and not a rhetorical trick. — unenlightened

But the rhetorical trick you use is that if Scuton talks about people fearing attacks by Islamists, that SOMEHOW means that he refutes the persecution of Muslims! Does Scruton say that? Where?

Do you think that an academic philosopher like Scruton would deny that Muslims have been persecuted? That makes him the 'holocaust denier'?

Again this is the typical tribalism I hate. If one talks let's say the bad things of X, then I MUST be praising the virtues and turning a blind eye on the bad thing Y has done. It doesn't make sense.

And it is true that muslims are persecuted by genuine islamaphobes. But I don't think its fair to conflate those who kill and torture muslims with those who wish to discuss differences in values etc. Islam encourages a discussion with the dis-believers, how else are we to call people to our religion if we stop them from talking and asking questions? — Mr Phil O'Sophy

The problem is the conflation, which makes things worst. It creates the percieved if not actual "PC-culture" environment of "if you open your mouth on this subject, you are persecuted", that actually nobody really is truly promoting. Yet this conflation of people like Scruton as being the malevolent Islamophobe / anti-Islamist spreading the gospel of bigotry if not racism simply makes things worse as there indeed are those kind of people.

Do you think that an academic philosopher like Scruton would deny that Muslims have been persecuted? That makes him the 'holocaust denier'? — ssu

No. What I am complaining about is that he is down-playing (as in completely ignoring) it, while up-playing the atrocities of Muslim extremists, in a way that gives comfort to rightwing extremists. And his talk of George Soros having an Empire is similarly loose and inflammatory. One talks loosely of a 'financial empire' and one can talk of a financier having political interests and aspirations, but again, he knows full well that Soros is a particular target of extreme right wing antisemitic conspiracy theories, and he is equivocally but knowingly lending legitimacy to such abhorrent ideas.

If one talks let's say the bad things of X, then I MUST be praising the virtues and turning a blind eye on the bad thing Y has done. It doesn't make sense. — ssu

I don't think I am doing that, and i don't think that is being done by every other critic of Scruton.

In this case he conjoins criticism of the term widely used to identify crimes targeted at muslims, with the mention of crimes perpetrated by muslims. He does the both together, it's not me presuming. What's the connection in his mind that puts these two in the same paragraph?

No. What I am complaining about is that he is down-playing (as in completely ignoring) it, while up-playing the atrocities of Muslim extremists, in a way that gives comfort to rightwing extremists. And his talk of George Soros having an Empire is similarly loose and inflammatory. — unenlightened

Thus he shouldn't have a job teaching philosophy?

I don't have to make that decision, and have no recommendation to make. I am criticising his writing. I wouldn't recommend him as a moderator, if that tells you anything.

I don't have to make that decision, and have no recommendation to make. I am criticising his writing. I wouldn't recommend him as a moderator, if that tells you anything. — unenlightened

I'm strongly against him--or anyone else--being sacked for anything they've expressed (at least insofar as it's not a contractual issue--non-disclosure clauses someone might have signed, etc.)

I think it's a good thing for philosophy professors to be provocative.

Re being a moderator, I don't want anyone to be a moderator if they're going to do much. ;-)

I think it's a good thing for philosophy professors to be provocative. — Terrapin Station

I don't. I think it is a good thing for philosophy professors to express unpopular ideas, and defend them with reasoned argument to the extent that they are reasonably defensible. Being provocative is something for trashy journalists, that I'm sure Scruton himself would abjure.

Students need to practice coming up with objections/counterarguments. That needs to occur on a spectrum from easy to not-so-easy, as we progress from 101-level courses to graduate-level courses.

First of all, what is this moslem, 'Mr Phil O'Sophy', doing here? As Mr. Orbán warned us time and time again, Europe and Islam don't mix. He is right that Europe should not submit to moslem invaders. Mr. Scruton was sacked because he backed Mr. Orbán's justified fear. Mr. Orbán was absolutely right to call moslems invaders and Mr. Scruton was right when he agreed that this is what moslems are. They are not refugees, they are invaders. They should not be allowed to exploit Europe and the same goes for 'converts' like 'Mr Phil O'Sophy'.

'Converts' are traitors invading from the inside. They should be send to the Middle East where they belong and not be allowed to exploit European lands and institutions. As moslems do not belong in Europe, this moslem does not belong to a Western Philosophy forum. He should stop quoting the murderer and pedophile muhammad in philosophy forums and go proselytize elsewhere. And this is not 'islamophobia', it's common sense, which most Europeans finally begin to recognize.

Those who left Hungary to work abroad are traitors too and because of that Mr. Orbán was completely justified in passing the overtime law. Hungarians that complain about 'slavery' should get rid of their invader mentality, thinking that they are above the Nation and its salvation.

Students need to practice coming up with objections/counterarguments — Terrapin Station

Well I've done my bit with Scruton, over to you to deal with the above.

Well I've done my bit with Scruton, over to you to deal with the above. — unenlightened

I'm not very interested in what he said. I don't know if Scruton has ever said much of anything I've agreed with. I'm primarily interested in the fact that he was sacked over saying something. That's what I care about.

I think your response to his reply is empty. His words are calm and considered explaining fully enough the context that was missed by the poor journalism (which is quite obviously “leftist”).

You merely picked out some apparent offense you took by his reprimanding of a political inclination that was espoused with the clear intent of smearing his name resulting in him being sacked from an unpaid governmental position - and don’t forget the purposeful selective quotes as well.

For all intensive purposes, I am a European, with European heritage. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

The moment you converted to islam, you denied your European heritage and embraced the moslem heritage. Enjoy your moslem heritage, but please do it outside Europe. Islam is not a part of European heritage.

Regarding Soros and Orbán. I don't know enough about them or their comments to say anything about them. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

You have access to the internet, so you can google and read Orbán's comments. It shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes, since he's one of those men who are not afraid to speak their mind. The way you exploit Europe has been described by Orbán, Scruton and others. By taking what belongs to Europeans. Moslems and moslem culture are alien to Europe and they should stick to what is their own.

With regards to your accusation that I'm proselytising — Mr Phil O'Sophy

It's not an accusation. It's what you said.

"how else are we to call people to our religion if we stop them from talking and asking questions".

And with regards to your accusations against my prophet, as they are quite heated topics that require a lot of patience and time to delve into, I will be doing a thread on that once I have finished university. So you will be welcome to comment on that once I have it posted. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

They are not accusations, they are historical facts. You better post your thread on moslem forums. If your fairytales keep other moslems from marrying kids and killing 'dis-believers', something good will have come out of it. We on the other had don't need your fairytales to denounce pedophilia.

The moment you converted to islam, you denied your European heritage and embraced the moslem heritage. Enjoy your moslem heritage, but please do it outside Europe. Islam is not a part of European heritage. — sunknight

You know how much of our 'European heritage' derives from ancient Islamic culture right? We're the inheritors of the Islamic Golden Age just as much as we are of Plato and Aristotle.

You know how much of our 'European heritage' derives from ancient Islamic culture right? — fdrake

Yes, I know. Nothing at all.

Got a wee bit reading to do then. The link I gave is a place to start.

Just to clarify; the man has been sacked as an unpaid adviser to the government.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing said: “Prof Sir Roger Scruton has been dismissed as chairman of the Building Better, Building Beautiful commission with immediate effect, following his unacceptable comments.”

Theresa May’s spokeswoman said the communities secretary, James Brokenshire, had sacked Scruton in a phone call. She said: “These comments are deeply offensive and completely unacceptable, and it is right that he has been dismissed.”

The interview prompted Labour to repeat its call from five months ago for Scruton to be sacked after it emerged that he had described Jews in Budapest as part of a “Soros empire”.

Dawn Butler, the shadow equalities secretary, said Scruton’s new comments were “despicable and invoke the language of white supremacists”.

Tell Mama, the anti-bigotry campaign, welcomed Scruton’s dismissal but raised questions about why he had been appointed in the first place.

Its director, Iman Atta, said: “Such dehumanising language falls far below the standards of those who advise government and undermine the struggle against Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred, antisemitism and racism.

Tory MPs including Tom Tugendhat and Johnny Mercer had joined calls for Scruton’s dismissal.

A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain said: “As the Conservative party faces its latest crisis on Islamophobia, it cannot continue with false promises to take the issue seriously … The reality is that these concerns will continue to recur until trust is rebuilt through – in part – an independent inquiry into Islamophobia in the party.”

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2019/apr/10/roger-scruton-calls-for-dismissal-islamophobiad-soros-remarks?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR268zYfowD1_FhGJyHbRL6KrvpLaAMwntn_6D9_ekuBMzFRm18OwiNKI1c#Echobox=1554906736

I wouldn't normally bother, on the assumption that folks can click a link and read an article. But it seems that some folks think I am doing something extraordinary in making a critical analysis. So I feel obliged to make explicit that there is support for this interpretation from both major parties, and from other interested parties, and not solely on the basis of one unkind and partisan interview.

That there is now evidence in the thread that Scruton has given comfort to the far right will I hope give some good reason to reconsider.

As another example of similar censuring, this time of a university law professor who used the N-word in class and later in the presence of a student, neither time directed at anyone, but purely in an educational environment: There was the offense and now the backlash: https://www.thecollegefix.com/emory-faces-censure-complaint-for-punishing-law-professor-who-referenced-n-word/

I'm familiar with it because it's a nearby University, so it's in the local news.

We live in a world where we search to be offended, usually to delegitimize and neutralize an opponent regarding something other than the merits of their position. What we need is a leader who speaks with no filter, does what he wants, and responds to critics with childish taunting and trolling as his followers celebrate in amusement. That's what we got at least.

:up:

When you will point me to some members who chose to study Plato and Aristotle in moslem countries, I will begin reading your link.

I didn't deny it. Its still apart of me. Which is only made clear by the fact that I admit that I am of Polish/Scottish decent, born and raised in England. I can't delete that, its something engrained into my being. Also, being muslim is a religious choice, being European is a biological/geographical fact. One is a choice, the other isn't. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Yes, you denied it. European culture has nothing to do with islamic culture, they don't mix. You can keep your postmodern identities, just have them somewhere else.

Like I said, I do plan on leaving. But this is my home and I'm here as long as I need to be. Christianity wasn't a part of European heritage once. I'm sure many pagans said the same thing when people began converting to it as well. After all, it too, like islam, originated in the Middle East. Why are you in favour of Christianity if it has such similar roots? Are you a pagan? Would you tell christians to leave on the same basis? If not why? — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Christianity and islam are not the same and it is no wonder that they don't mix either. The fact that Christianity was capable of becoming a part of European culture does not mean that islam can or that it should.

Not as Alien as you think my friend. The values the west has accepted over the past 70 or so years are much more alien to the western heritage than the values held by Islam. Things have changed so drastically over the past century in Europe, that what you seek to persevere is something completely new and counter to your roots. Islam has much more in common with our history than the modern age does: — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Multiculturalism and postmodernism which is how leftists try to destroy European culture is as alien as islam is.

again, you're conflating categories. I'm a European muslim. If I go any where in the world, they won't refer to me as middle eastern because I'm a muslim. I look and sound like a British person. I have blonde hair and green eyes. I can't stop being European, thats not how it works. I stopped being Christian, and gave up being an atheist. These are things you can cease to be when you no longer prescribe to them. But this can't be said with regards to biological and geographical heritage.

You're welcome to give an argument as to why you think I'm wrong. But like I say, I think the problem is that you are misunderstanding the difference between where someone is from and what they believe. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

The only problem is that you try to deny that the European region has a culture and a history of its own. I have news for you though, it does have one and it's not compatible with islamic culture. Those who embrace the islamic culture, have effectively denied their European one, no matter how blonde their hair is or what their passport says.

Yes, it was an accusation, and as I explained in my response, you're wrong. Thats a comment on how muslims can only do dawah if they encourage conversation. That does not mean I'm doing dawah now. Like I say, it was relevant to the discussion on this thread, and as proselytising is against the forum rules, I'm sure if it is to be considered as such the moderators will pull me up on it. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Nice try.

I'm not telling you to embrace pedophilia. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

I didn't say you did.

Also, there are some misconceptions about the fact that because Mohammad married someone at X years old, that it translates to mean that it is an obligation that muslims marry girls at X years old. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

No one said it's an obligation. Keep twisting words. I only said that as a matter of fact you moslems marry kids. Good luck explaining to other moslems why they're not allowed to do what their role model did.

Knowledge requires that it be based on knowing. What you've stated is a belief, and if the evidence suggests that your belief is incorrect, then you would be terribly mistaken to consider it knowledge. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Knowledge requires that it be based on reality. Reality says that those who want to study Plato Aristotle or physics study in the West and those who want to memorize the koran study in moslem countries.

When you will point me to some members who chose to study Plato and Aristotle in moslem countries, I will begin reading your link. — sunknight

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotelianism#Islamic_world

Guess you have to start reading.

Multiculturalism and postmodernism which is how leftists try to destroy European culture is as alien as islam is. — sunknight

What is European culture? What food do they eat, language do they speak, religion do they have, and government system do they use?

The only problem is you try to deny that the European region has a culture of its own. I've got news for you though, it does have one and it's not compatible with islamic culture. Those who embrace the islamic culture, have effectively denied their European one, no matter how blonde their hair is or what their passport says. — sunknight

Why did the Germans bomb London if they all had the same culture?

Also, what is the primary religion of these European nations: Albania, Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina?

And you're welcome to express it, if you make the effort to be constructive about it and try to philosophise — Mr Phil O'Sophy

If I make the effort to sugarcoat it you mean.

You could say: — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Yes, I could. But I don't have to. This post https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5535/the-wests-moral-superiority-to-islam/p1 does not do it, this post https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/274112 does not it, this post https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/275054 does not it. Most posts don't it.

has made it very clear that you can express such views. It's not what you've said specifically but your form and how you've presented yourself as an extremely aggressive interlocutor, thats unwilling to justify his claims, offer any detailed argumentation, or show any consideration to consider the arguments being put forward in response to your claims without simply outright dismissing them while again, not showing any justification as to why they should be dismissed other than referring to them as 'post-modern' or 'leftist'. Which is.... — Mr Phil O'Sophy

I've done nothing different than most here habitually do or what Mr. Orbán, whom Mr. Scruton defended, does. The lol factor is that this is what this thread is about.

I've done nothing different than most here habitually do — sunknight

Sunknight: Best Practice is to proceed forward cautiously until you have established what you can get away with and what the moderators will stomp on. Like all members here, the moderators have uniquely sensitive corns on their toes which, when stepped on just so, send them into tizzies. As far as I know, the idiosyncrasies of the moderators' sensitive toes have not been mapped.

Generally 'slash and burn' approaches will get bad feedback. Try to avoid.

It is the case that if you want to disparage Islam, transgenders, gays, (anybody, basically, to whom the suffix "phobia" is regularly attached) you should do so in an unusually elegant fashion.

I get your angry and you have your reasons why. I understand. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

My beloved Traitor don't overestimate your ability to read my emotions! My intentions shouldn't be in your concerns either, or anyone else's. I appreciate your humanistic concern though. I must confess I almost like you. The cancer of islam hasn't consumed all your Europeanness after all :lol: How about reverting to the Good? Please, don't ban me for proselytizing :rofl:

Deus vult! Deus vult! Deus vult!

Remind me not to give rope to strangers as a present. :broken:

No. What I am complaining about is that he is down-playing (as in completely ignoring) it, while up-playing the atrocities of Muslim extremists, in a way that gives comfort to rightwing extremists. — unenlightened

You then have to give the a concrete example of the downplaying or ignoring a question put to him. So the interviewer really has to ask something that Scruton really avoids. And I ought to emphasize just what the whole topic of the discussion was!

And his talk of George Soros having an Empire is similarly loose and inflammatory. — unenlightened

And how inflammatory is it to talk about the Koch brothers having an Empire or the Mercer family? And as George Soros is from Hungary, it's no wonder that he has ties to the country. Here you should really concentrate on what Scruton actually says. NOT what some alt-right conspiracy theorist alleges Scruton to have said. I assume that obviously the topic of the discussion was Hungary and it's political situation.

he is equivocally but knowingly lending legitimacy to such abhorrent ideas. — unenlightened

Ok, so discussing a topic that conspiracy theorists make their absurd theories is 'knowingly lending to abhorrent ideas'. Well, this is again an example of the political tribalism and show the inability in handling issues openly.

I agree. It also distracts us from seeing people who are islamophobic, because we keep looking in the wrong direction. Islamophobe's tend to be not so vocal out of fear of persecution. They already believe in this major conspiracy that the muzzie's are taking over, and so due to the fear bottle it up. In some cases this leads to them lashing out with violent actions rather than being able to work through their prejudices because they've been isolated into echo chambers (either voluntarily or through blanket bans on social networks) where everyone tells them they're right, and offers zero intellectual engagement or push back that may have been exactly what they needed in order to free them of their prejudices and bigotry. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Good points.

And if we talk about the true hostility against muslims (and jews etc), one noticeable thing is that extreme-right terrorism deliberately uses the "lone gunman" tactics. No extreme-right organization takes ever credit of any terrorist attacks. And those who are terrorist perpetrators distance themselves from others. This strategy has been noticed for example by the FBI. This is contrary to how any loonie that decides to be a home grown mujaheddin is accredited to ISIS and make's the terrorism instantly "international".

The extreme-right also seeks to use anything that could be interpreted as being supportive to their views and naturally the left notices this. And then you people (who generally oppose anything from the right) making the conclusion that Roger Scruton is encouraging extremism.

sunknight
its strange that you would call a conservative muslim (a moral objectivist), a post-modern leftist. — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Actually it's not strange. Just think of putting everything you don't like together and assume it makes a coherent entity. Eases the ranting about it.

(Oh, he got banned... of course, the tidiness of the forum is actually very nice. Thank you!)

Scruton never said 'Jewish intelligentsia networks', which would have nasty connotations, implying the age-old belief in a Jewish conspiracy. He spoke of 'Budapest intelligentsia' and 'networks around the Soros empire'. To me at least, that has very different connotations. — andrewk

What the heck would "antisemitic" refer to if either of those are sufficient to be antisemitic? (Not that he even used the phrase "Jewish intelligentsia networks," but we can pretend that he did.) — Terrapin Station

His exact quote was, "many of the Budapest intelligentsia are Jewish, and form part of the extensive networks around the Soros Empire," and which is a hairsplitting distinction from outright saying, "Jewish intelligentsia networks", and committed or even casual antisemites wouldn't see any significant difference. Further, the concept of a "Soros Empire" is at least a two decade long antisemitic trope, and particularly pervasive in Hungary. It's the idea of manipulative elitists Jews who act as puppet masters behind global and state affairs, and policies.

I should also note the audacity behind saying that the term Islamophobia is mere propaganda, less than a month after 50 Muslims were brutally murdered in their Mosque.

I should also say that a long-term coworker at my company was recently fired for making a mildly racist comment towards a black coworker. I didn't see his termination at all unjustified. Roger Scruton, who was in a government position, doesn't get exemption simply because he's a celebrated philosopher or because he sanitizes his comments as profound, philosophical, or relevant ideas worthy of public debate or discussion. They are not.

I thought he was specifically claiming that child marriages can occur with muslims? — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Sunnis are dependent on secular authority to outlaw child marriage, slavery, and domestic abuse. It just means that an imam can only sort of indirectly condemn these things. For a westerner, this is strange, because Christian clergymen were a crucial element of the elimination of slavery in the west. Christians depend on their clergymen to lay out strong condemnations of whatever the community hates.

To an atheist, it might seem childish to depend on the condemnations of preachers. But it is what it is.