WEF and Globalization

[Activate your inner truth]

12 hours ago, EiE said:

 

totally, just take the vaccine like khomeinei did live on television towards his entire nation (which has never happened before)........exactly as the WEF elites want them too....

 Yes I would say their was a campaign to use leaders (political/religious as well as sports people and celebrities)  To put the pressure on their populations and this happened right across all countries as far as I know.  I don't know what Khomeinei's intentions were for coming on live tv but i guess perhaps that he was not informed of what this was all really about, which i find hard to believe or he- like all leaders across the world was told what to do. Also do you have the full data for how many people took the jabs? I am  not sure how reliable they are  as I remember here in the U.K they outright lied how many people took the jabs, claiming only five million have refused and that was not true. I personally believe that the national tv jab taking by leaders were  fake.  That I agree was a stage show to deceive their peoples. Yet we need to look at what might be going on deeper, even if many took it if their leaders did too.  There are many who also would use their intuition and  say no we are not taking them. The dajjal system have control over most if not all nations. The w.e.f and damage from the jabs is out in the open but  now we need to do our best to work with the good souls in all countries. Also there are those in Iran of a spiritual light who will not do what the w.e.f want. Those ones will work for Imam Mahdi aj. 

[علوي]

8 hours ago, Activate your inner truth said:

Ok I was not aware he was a zionist. I thought he was speaks out allot about issues and was a voice for the people. I think I will need to read up on him more.  We could do the same idea with our own and bring the business men/women teachers, industry experts ect and start our thing.  

Yeah he even stormed Al-Aqsa with the Israeli forces. 

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235077070-jordan-petersons-message-to-the-muslim-world/?do=findComment&comment=3392546

[Activate your inner truth]

On 2/6/2023 at 2:06 PM, علوي said:

Yeah he even stormed Al-Aqsa with the Israeli forces. 

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235077070-jordan-petersons-message-to-the-muslim-world/?do=findComment&comment=3392546

There seem to be different opinions about him in the comments on the video. Most seem negative but a few that are saying he does desire peace. I only saw him walking calmly rather than storming. Although he seems to be ok with Israel, I’m still reading up on him. Let's see whilst he may support Zionism, he still does have some good ideas about society and his alternative platform to the w.e.f. (let's see if it turns out to be something good or not.)

[Ashvazdanghe]

19 hours ago, Activate your inner truth said:

Yes I would say their was a campaign to use leaders (political/religious as well as sports people and celebrities)  To put the pressure on their populations and this happened right across all countries as far as I know.

Salam this pressure campaign has ben about put pressure on people to for using  vaccines which have been made by big pharmas likewise Moderna & Phizer but on the other hand this campaign has opposed using any safe vaccines likewise sinopharam & sputnik & cubian & Iranian made vaccines .

19 hours ago, Activate your inner truth said:

I don't know what Khomeinei's intentions were for coming on live tv but i guess perhaps that he was not informed of what this was all really about, which i find hard to believe or he- like all leaders across the world was told what to do.

He has been well aware of his actions which it's crystal clear that he opposed against pressure campaign about using American & British made vaccinces likewise Moderna & Phizer  by Zionists & anti iran grooups which Ironically leader of Mko terrorist cult has been greatests supporter offorce  injecting ofAmerican & British made vaccinces likewise Moderna & Phizer   to peopel of iran which Imam Khamenei wisely has opposed all of these pressure campaigns but on the other hand he has supported all safe vaccines which has been made by Iranian scientists or acquired from trustworthy sources which his presence in TV has been about encouraging people to take safe homegrown vaccines but on the other hand he has not forced anyone to take jab which some of so called too  hardliners & holier than thou has opposed taking jab which they have not faced any punishment  which all people in Iran have taken jabs voluntary without facing any pressure from government & etc .

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 2/6/2023 at 2:49 PM, Activate your inner truth said:

There seem to be different opinions about him in the comments on the video. Most seem negative but a few that are saying he does desire peace. I only saw him walking calmly rather than storming. Although he seems to be ok with Israel, I’m still reading up on him. Let's see whilst he may support Zionism, he still does have some good ideas about society and his alternative platform to the w.e.f. (let's see if it turns out to be something good or not.)

Salam when you see Zionists propganda so then ypu will see that all of them claim that they are supporting liberalism & world peace & democracy which ironicall they call fake state of Israel as only democracy in west  Asia or ME which sometimes it looks like that they have good ideas  with mask of good & calm  people which even maybe they criticize w.e.f & etc but on the other hand they turn blind eye on any violation of human rights abour Plaestinias by Zionists which these people who hide themselves behind mask of calmness & goodness are more dangerous than brutal IDF personel.

[Activate your inner truth]

On 2/7/2023 at 7:17 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam this pressure campaign has ben about put pressure on people to for using  vaccines which have been made by big pharmas likewise Moderna & Phizer but on the other hand this campaign has opposed using any safe vaccines likewise sinopharam & sputnik & cubian & Iranian made vaccines .

He has been well aware of his actions which it's crystal clear that he opposed against pressure campaign about using American & British made vaccinces likewise Moderna & Phizer  by Zionists & anti iran grooups which Ironically leader of Mko terrorist cult has been greatests supporter offorce  injecting ofAmerican & British made vaccinces likewise Moderna & Phizer   to peopel of iran which Imam Khamenei wisely has opposed all of these pressure campaigns but on the other hand he has supported all safe vaccines which has been made by Iranian scientists or acquired from trustworthy sources which his presence in TV has been about encouraging people to take safe homegrown vaccines but on the other hand he has not forced anyone to take jab which some of so called too  hardliners & holier than thou has opposed taking jab which they have not faced any punishment  which all people in Iran have taken jabs voluntary without facing any pressure from government & etc .

 Ws I agree with you about big pharmacy companies putting pressure on the countries. 

(I will still need to research regarding the sinopharam, spuntik and cuban ones)  As I have been reading up some views from people who are saying that they may also be dangerous. Once I have finished studying then I can make a a decision.) But from what you said yes the rest makes sense.  One thing I wanted to ask was to check the birthrates in Iran, if they have dropped allot as well? (since jabs were given ) There have been allot of miscarriages and still births in some countries since the jabs started but i need to see if its similar in countries that had non western vaccines. 

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

18 hours ago, Activate your inner truth said:

One thing I wanted to ask was to check the birthrates in Iran, if they have dropped allot as well? (since jabs were given ) There have been allot of miscarriages and still births in some countries since the jabs started but i need to see if its similar in countries that had non western vaccines. 

Salam receiving jabs have no affection on birthrate  & in similar fashion miscrriage  in Iran however issue of  decreasing birthrate is mostly due to wrong policy of some officials in previous years since ending Saddam-Iran war which they have foolowed intructions of WHO &etc for decreasing population in Iran which recently some policies have been initiated  to redo this forced & wrong policy of decreasing population due to strict warning from Imam Khamenei .

[Dubilex]

On 2/6/2023 at 12:19 PM, Activate your inner truth said:

Ok I was not aware he was a zionist. I thought he was speaks out allot about issues and was a voice for the people. I think I will need to read up on him more.  We could do the same idea with our own and bring the business men/women teachers, industry experts ect and start our thing.  

Jordan Peterson used to be an excellent speaker, a proponent of truth and rationality. But in the last 2 years or so, he has completely gone off the rails and become a neocon zionist. Especially ever since he signed up with DW.

 

Jordan Peterson these days is unrecognizeable from who he was in the past. He is a hardcore neocon zionist these days who wants regime change, and who completely supports Israel. He has also softened his stance against the woke cult. Quite sad to see him go from being a bold rebel to a zionist shill

Edited February 10 by Dubilex

[Azadeh307]

I am not a fan of JP. I remember watching one of his videos some time back where his position on Israel was literally people may be jealous because Jewish people have around 15 IQ points above the general public. As a doctor of clinical psychology who graduated in 2017, I appreciate his position on gender pronouns and refusing to engage with them. However, lets be real just because he was the first mainstream psychologist to come forward about this Muslims have been long saying this so his contribution was nothing new... just that he was saying it as a non-Muslim. 

[Dubilex]

20 hours ago, Azadeh307 said:

However, lets be real just because he was the first mainstream psychologist to come forward about this Muslims have been long saying this so his contribution was nothing new... just that he was saying it as a non-Muslim. 

Unfortunately, muslims in the west are silent on these issues. Muslims should be taking the charge in resisting the woke indoctrination of society and defend honor and tradition. But muslims are either indifferent, or there are muslims who actively support the woke left such as Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib

Edited February 11 by Dubilex

[Azadeh307]

Muslims in the west talk about it privately but don't feel safe to talk about it in public forums I guess. There is a lot of backlash to a Muslim psychologist talking about this. When the issue first came up I was a doctoral student and silent on the issue because I didn't want the tens of thousands of dollars and years of my time to get thrown away because my school wouldn't graduate me. Then many students graduate with huge amounts of debt so they need to be able to work to pay this off. Therefore there is immense pressure not to rock the boat. Also the state boards of psychology will revoke licenses for going against the mainstream and most people can't afford this risk. Right now in California if someone comes to a psychologist and requests guidance to undergo a transgender sex change and the doctor doesn't believe in that being for the best for the patient then the doctor has to refer the patient to a doctor to someone who does believe this is in the best interest of the patient or they may be disciplined by the board of psychology for neglecting the patient. The issue is being treated like a medical doctor who doesn't specialize in diabetes referring a patient to a doctor who does specialize in that. 

I am a little bit vocal about it now because I got married and my husband has a successful career and I don't have to work. 

[Activate your inner truth]

On 2/9/2023 at 6:35 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam receiving jabs have no affection on birthrate  & in similar fashion miscrriage  in Iran however issue of  decreasing birthrate is mostly due to wrong policy of some officials in previous years since ending Saddam-Iran war which they have foolowed intructions of WHO &etc for decreasing population in Iran which recently some policies have been initiated  to redo this forced & wrong policy of decreasing population due to strict warning from Imam Khamenei .

 

Ws that's interesting, its good that the jabs have had not had any affects on birthrates in Iran (sadly not the same for many other countries since the jabs started) Yes I do remember that Iran was implementing a population control program a while back and thnak God Imam Khameni to redo this now.  I hope other countries will have the courage to do the same too. 

[Activate your inner truth]

On 2/10/2023 at 4:01 PM, Dubilex said:

Jordan Peterson used to be an excellent speaker, a proponent of truth and rationality. But in the last 2 years or so, he has completely gone off the rails and become a neocon zionist. Especially ever since he signed up with DW.

 

Jordan Peterson these days is unrecognizeable from who he was in the past. He is a hardcore neocon zionist these days who wants regime change, and who completely supports Israel. He has also softened his stance against the woke cult. Quite sad to see him go from being a bold rebel to a zionist shill

 

That's a shame. I liked his talks and found him inspiring.  I guess it happens.  

[Activate your inner truth]

5 hours ago, Dubilex said:

Unfortunately, muslims in the west are silent on these issues. Muslims should be taking the charge in resisting the woke indoctrination of society and defend honor and tradition. But muslims are either indifferent, or there are muslims who actively support the woke left such as Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib

Your right.  Maybe some are lost within and need to find their inner compass and direction again.  I have not seen much on these topics in our community here in London.  I like what you said about defending honor and tradition. Two forces that are much needed in this world. 

[Dubilex]

17 hours ago, Activate your inner truth said:

Your right.  Maybe some are lost within and need to find their inner compass and direction again.  I have not seen much on these topics in our community here in London.  I like what you said about defending honor and tradition. Two forces that are much needed in this world. 

What's even more sad is that it's a golden chance for muslims. The decline of christianity has left a vacuum behind that muslims can easily fill. Right now, many non-muslims have a desire to return to tradition and honor. But instead of offering them the truth and light of Islam, many muslim groups are either indifferent and passive, or they let themselves get brainwashed and they ally themselves with the LGBTQ marxists

Edited February 12 by Dubilex

[Northwest]

On 2/7/2023 at 8:17 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam this pressure campaign has ben about put pressure on people to for using  vaccines which have been made by big pharmas likewise Moderna & Phizer but on the other hand this campaign has opposed using any safe vaccines likewise sinopharam & sputnik & cubian & Iranian made vaccines .

@Ashvazdanghe @Activate your inner truth

According to this source, both Sputnik and Sinopharm contain graphene oxide and/or other harmful ingredients, just like Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and so on. Iran has ordered and used both Sputnik and Sinopharm, so the Iranian government is complicit, just like those of Russia and China. If Iran’s domestic vaccine contains foreign ingredients it would be the same as the aforementioned. But unfortunately Iran has allowed its citizens access to the Sputnik and Sinopharm Trojan horses. Maybe the Supreme Leader isn’t involved, but certainly the civilian reformists are.

On 2/10/2023 at 5:01 PM, Dubilex said:

Jordan Peterson used to be an excellent speaker, a proponent of truth and rationality. But in the last 2 years or so, he has completely gone off the rails and become a neocon zionist. Especially ever since he signed up with DW.

Jordan Peterson these days is unrecognizeable from who he was in the past. He is a hardcore neocon zionist these days who wants regime change, and who completely supports Israel. He has also softened his stance against the woke cult. Quite sad to see him go from being a bold rebel to a zionist shill

@Dubilex, do you know why part of the traditionalist, non-Muslim right gets drawn toward anti-Muslim crusades rather than alliance with Muslims vs. globalists?

[Northwest]

On 1/28/2023 at 2:28 PM, Dubilex said:

Again, I hope you wake up from your ignorance and study communism. You should also read Marx's book Das Kapital. I wonder if you've even read anything about the tenets of communism and marxism, or if you just attack capitalism because it's the trendy thing to do these days. In any case, I hope you learn more about communism, you can also try to speak to some of the victims of socialism and hear what they have to say.

@Dubilex

It doesn’t help matters that the capitalist West has muddied the waters by spreading distortions and/or outright falsehoods about communist and/or socialist states. If the reality were as horrible as alleged, there would be no reason for the West to add fabrications, rather than let the horrors speak for themselves. For example, to this day the anti-Russian, pro-NATO Ukrainian fascists continue to disseminate 1930s-era propaganda about the so-called Holodomor, in which Stalin supposedly attempted to commit genocide vs. the Ukrainian people by starving them to death, even though works such as Douglas Tottle’s Fraud, Famine and Fascism (Toronto: Progress Books, 1987) have shown that photographic and anecdotal “evidence” was actually fabricated by the West and its fascist allies at the time. @AbdusSibtayn has even mentioned this elsewhere on this forum. Even internal CIA documents acknowledge that many, if not most, of the GULAG prisoners under Stalin were actually petty criminals rather than political prisoners. The phrase “former criminals” is used in the CIA’s documents themselves to refer to 95% of the prisoners. Also, cases in which prisoners were transferred between camps are erroneously counted in Western sources as releases due to near-death status. Also, the release of the Soviet archives since 1989–91 has conclusively demonstrated that Western estimates of prisoners and mortality in the GULAG were significantly inflated. Again, if Stalin’s GULAG were so genocidal, then logically there shouldn’t have existed the need to inflate statistics.

Unsurprisingly, pro-Zionist, anti-Muslim fascists such as Jordan Peterson have also acted as anticommunist shills, often recycling the same hackneyed narratives about Muslims in reference to communists. Just replace Stalin or Mao with Hassan Nasrallah and you’ll see the same basic formulations being applied to the designated Enemy, the Other. The underlying premise is the same: it is necessary to turn entire nations into literal wastelands, should they choose the “wrong” option by supporting communists, Islamic fundamentalists, or anyone else who opposes the capitalist-run West’s agenda(s). Even former CIA operatives admit, for instance, that the vast majority of Cubans in 1961 supported Fidel Castro’s efforts to expropriate foreign capitalist assets in Cuba, eliminate the Batista-era comprador system, and secure national sovereignty. Let me cite the words of E. Howard Hunt, who was actually involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion: “I stayed three or four days in Havana...and all I could find was a lot of enthusiasm for Fidel Castro.” This is the assessment of a hardcore anticommunist CIA officer who was actually in Cuba in the early 1960s and was involved in American attempts to overthrow and even assassinate Castro. So in your viewpoint if the majority of Cubans, Vietnamese, Russians, Venezuelans, et al. end up supporting a socialistic economic regime, their nations should be systematically destabilised and ravaged by the capitalist West? Or they are simply ignorant “natives” who need to be taught a lesson in “democracy,” just like the “impudent” revolutionary Iranians who deposed the Shah in 1979?

Here’s a quotation from Winston Churchill, who played a major role in the West’s covert—and not-so-covert—attempt to overthrow Soviet Russia in 1917–21:

Quote

“Were the allies in the war with Soviet Russia? Of course no. But they killed Soviet people as soon as they caught their eye; on Russian soil they remained as conquerors; they supplied weapons to the enemies of the Soviet government; they blocked its ports; they sank his warships. They ardently sought the fall of the Soviet government and made plans for its fall. But to declare war on him is a shame! Intervention is a disgrace! They kept repeating that it made absolutely no difference to them how the Russians handle their internal affairs. They wanted to remain impartial and struck blow after blow” (Churchill V. World Crisis. M.-L., 1932. p. 157).

(Translated from the Russian via Google Translate)

Bear in mind that the “they” refers to the principal Allied Powers of the First World War—the U.S., U.K., White Russia, France, Italy, and Japan, including their colonial dependencies. All these powers “ardently sought the fall of the Soviet government and made plans for its fall.” Churchill does not mince words. Basically the Reds were facing a full-scale war imposed on virtually all fronts, backed by the enormous resources of the most powerful empires on the planet. This does not even account for the fact that the Central Powers, notably Imperial Germany, were just as hostile to the Reds as the Allies: in March 1918 the Germans forced the Bolsheviks to cede their most valuable industrial and agricultural assets to the Central Powers, in the vital Caucasian and Ukrainian regions. Up until the Armistice of November the Reds also had to face the massive influx of pro-Entente counterrevolutionary forces as well. Yet we are to believe that the Reds were and are tools of the big bankers and industrialists. Well, my advice to you is: take up your claims with Churchill. Prior to World War I the Rothschild dynasty exercised near-total control over Western finance and hence the levers of power. If they or their ilk were behind Bolshevism, Churchill, being an arch-Zionist, would have known.

But of course, it was the Reds themselves who provoked the West by overthrowing the Provisional Government of Russia in October 1917! They must be to blame!

The fact that the Red Terror was itself a response to Western intervention—that the institution of the Terror in August 1918 was preceded by a massive influx of Western aid to armed counterrevolutionaries—is rarely, if ever, emphasised. The record in fact discloses that the capitalist side provoked the civil war in Russia, that the Reds would have prevailed on their own if not for massive foreign assistance to the Czarist Whites, who had many more officers than men in their ranks. After all, that is why the Whites relied on foreign rather than domestic support. (Incidentally, the exact same scenario has taken place in Syria since 2011: if not for astronomical external support, the anti-Assad forces would have long ceased to exist.) In March the Allied or Entente Powers landed a force at Murmansk, in response to the Bolsheviks’ signing the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk: therefore the intervention was from the outset a hostile act. From this point onward the Allies earnestly bolstered all anti-Soviet forces throughout Russia, using the Bolsheviks’ “peace” with the Central Powers as an excuse—even though Allied interference in Russia continued to accelerate following the Armistice of November 1918. In fact the Whites’ counteroffensives peaked in 1919, culminating in the failed marches on Moscow and Petrograd.

You have clichés on your side. I have actual, historical, verifiable, documentary evidence.

[Ashvazdanghe]

9 hours ago, Northwest said:

According to this source, both Sputnik and Sinopharm contain graphene oxide and/or other harmful ingredients, just like Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and so on. Iran has ordered and used both Sputnik and Sinopharm, so the Iranian government is complicit, just like those of Russia and China. If Iran’s domestic vaccine contains foreign ingredients it would be the same as the aforementioned. But unfortunately Iran has allowed its citizens access to the Sputnik and Sinopharm Trojan horses. Maybe the Supreme Leader isn’t involved, but certainly the civilian reformists are.

hi any type of vaccine maybe contains harmful ingredients likewise  graphene oxide & etc which as any type of medicne vaccines have pros & cons too which any medicne whether chemical or natural based maybe contains harmful ingrediants which in small scales of it our immune system can overcome or get rid of it which Sputnik has been safest vaccines when it has chosen by Iran when Iran has been under pressure of multiple campaigns for using vaccines which later it has been replaced by Sinopharm  which in opposition of  Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca these two have least negative effects on people which Imam Khamenei has emaphacised about just using homegrown vaccines  which have  been made by Iranian scientists which also  their total safety & unharmfulness  have been proven which later also allowed using safests foreign vaccines which have  not been  produced by America & Britain which calling  the Sputnik and Sinopharm as Trojan horses has came from Zionist & American big Pharms to force people to take their vaccines which  so called reformist party  in opposition of Imam Khamenei has been ready to use  American & British vaccines likwise Pfizer, Moderna which AstraZenec has been used in too little  percentage due to pressures of so called reformist party.

[Ashvazdanghe]

6 hours ago, Northwest said:

the majority of Cubans, Vietnamese, Russians, Venezuelans, et al. end up supporting a socialistic economic regime, their nations should be systematically destabilised and ravaged by the capitalist West? Or they are simply ignorant “natives” who need to be taught a lesson in “democracy,” just like the “impudent” revolutionary Iranians who deposed the Shah in 1979?

Hi non othem are true which Fidel Castro & Che Guevara  have dine it for fighting with oppression of America which it hsa been enslaved people in Cuba & lation America in most brutal way just for fulfilling it's interests so therefore they have chosen only opposite option against Captalist America  & west which in all of these countries & Iran most important matter has been fighting with oppression of any oppressor which later America has tried to use void  slogan of teaching democracy for altering & coeeupting these revolutions & oppsitions againt it anyway Iran has introduced a new way of opposition & fighting with oppresion through religion which in both of Capitalist & communist groups religion has been  considerd as drug of nation or a tool for controlling masses by elites which Islamic revolution of Iran which has been inspired from Imam hussian (as)'s standing against coruption & injustice & oppression has introduced a new third way of using religion in favor of oppressed people & fighting with injustice & oppresion & motivating people for doing any good deed in this way.

[AbdusSibtayn]

On 1/19/2023 at 10:35 PM, EiE said:

The "shia" of today are uninterested in such a discussion.
Why would they bother?

They already have the right to a yearly Muharram programme as well as the annual "we stand against oppression" parade. That's sufficient for them......... they are content.

it's like taking candy from a baby.

The vast majority of them simply don't read enough.

Hair-splitting on tatbir, mutah, historical accuracy of latmiyas, sayyid and non-sayyid marriages and swooning over celebrity nohekhwans is clearly the priority. Those biryani and halwa-guzzling gatherings of gheeba disguised as religious functions and 'muh culture' ethnofascism do take a toll on one's brain, I guess.

Discussions involving international relations, economics, social studies, history, literature, philosophy etc are clearly beyond the average Shia's intellectual wavelength. On the contrary, look at the level of discourse in Sunni masjids.

It's a most pathetic state of affairs.

[rkazmi33]

19 minutes ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

The vast majority of them simply don't read enough.

Hair-splitting on tatbir, mutah, historical accuracy of latmiyas, sayyid and non-sayyid marriages and swooning over celebrity nohekhwans is clearly the priority. Those biryani and halwa-guzzling gatherings of gheeba disguised as religious functions and 'muh culture' ethnofascism do take a toll on one's brain, I guess.

Discussions involving international relations, economics, social studies, history, literature, philosophy etc are clearly beyond the average Shia's intellectual wavelength. On the contrary, look at the level of discourse in Sunni masjids.

It's a most pathetic state of affairs.

I beg to differ. You should read this thread

 

Akhbari people have their defects but the other crowd is far from perfect. They don't talk about variety of subjects, they only talk about wealthy and successful people being better than others and they only shame people who are unsuccessful in their careers or personal life. I think sunni speakers aren't much better. If people like Andrew Tate and Jordon Peterson are getting interested in Islam, I can guess what sunni speakers talk about. I think akhbaris have just become an easy target because they are fewer in number. At least they don't give anxiety or depression to their audience. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

3 hours ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

The vast majority of them simply don't read enough.

 

Salam I totally agree with you about this.

Quote

Hair-splitting on tatbir, mutah, historical accuracy of latmiyas, sayyid and non-sayyid marriages and swooning over celebrity nohekhwans is clearly the priority. Those biryani and halwa-guzzling gatherings of gheeba disguised as religious functions and 'muh culture' ethnofascism do take a toll on one's brain, I guess.

This is vary on each country & country which it seems these things have more value in Pakistan & Indian saubcontinent than other countries likewise Afhanistan which shia people  in Afghanistan must take care more which in  simalar fashion it's lesser in Iran anyway still people in Iran & Afghanistan are  affecting with celebrities too.

3 hours ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

Discussions involving international relations, economics, social studies, history, literature, philosophy etc are clearly beyond the average Shia's intellectual wavelength. On the contrary, look at the level of discourse in Sunni masjids.

This is also is different in each country which for examples these matters have been  more discussed in Iran or Iraq which many Shia intellectuals are talking &  discussing in Iran & somehow Iraq & Lebanon  which in opposition of your claim about Sunni Masjids which majority of their majids have too rigid atmosphere about just practing religion without involving in such matters which only fewSunni  Masjids have these discourses.

 

[Dubilex]

On 2/13/2023 at 12:14 AM, Northwest said:

@Dubilex

It doesn’t help matters that the capitalist West has muddied the waters by spreading distortions and/or outright falsehoods about communist and/or socialist states. If the reality were as horrible as alleged, there would be no reason for the West to add fabrications, rather than let the horrors speak for themselves. For example, to this day the anti-Russian, pro-NATO Ukrainian fascists continue to disseminate 1930s-era propaganda about the so-called Holodomor, in which Stalin supposedly attempted to commit genocide vs. the Ukrainian people by starving them to death, even though works such as Douglas Tottle’s Fraud, Famine and Fascism (Toronto: Progress Books, 1987) have shown that photographic and anecdotal “evidence” was actually fabricated by the West and its fascist allies at the time. @AbdusSibtayn has even mentioned this elsewhere on this forum. Even internal CIA documents acknowledge that many, if not most, of the GULAG prisoners under Stalin were actually petty criminals rather than political prisoners. The phrase “former criminals” is used in the CIA’s documents themselves to refer to 95% of the prisoners. Also, cases in which prisoners were transferred between camps are erroneously counted in Western sources as releases due to near-death status. Also, the release of the Soviet archives since 1989–91 has conclusively demonstrated that Western estimates of prisoners and mortality in the GULAG were significantly inflated. Again, if Stalin’s GULAG were so genocidal, then logically there shouldn’t have existed the need to inflate statistics.

Unsurprisingly, pro-Zionist, anti-Muslim fascists such as Jordan Peterson have also acted as anticommunist shills, often recycling the same hackneyed narratives about Muslims in reference to communists. Just replace Stalin or Mao with Hassan Nasrallah and you’ll see the same basic formulations being applied to the designated Enemy, the Other. The underlying premise is the same: it is necessary to turn entire nations into literal wastelands, should they choose the “wrong” option by supporting communists, Islamic fundamentalists, or anyone else who opposes the capitalist-run West’s agenda(s). Even former CIA operatives admit, for instance, that the vast majority of Cubans in 1961 supported Fidel Castro’s efforts to expropriate foreign capitalist assets in Cuba, eliminate the Batista-era comprador system, and secure national sovereignty. Let me cite the words of E. Howard Hunt, who was actually involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion: “I stayed three or four days in Havana...and all I could find was a lot of enthusiasm for Fidel Castro.” This is the assessment of a hardcore anticommunist CIA officer who was actually in Cuba in the early 1960s and was involved in American attempts to overthrow and even assassinate Castro. So in your viewpoint if the majority of Cubans, Vietnamese, Russians, Venezuelans, et al. end up supporting a socialistic economic regime, their nations should be systematically destabilised and ravaged by the capitalist West? Or they are simply ignorant “natives” who need to be taught a lesson in “democracy,” just like the “impudent” revolutionary Iranians who deposed the Shah in 1979?

Here’s a quotation from Winston Churchill, who played a major role in the West’s covert—and not-so-covert—attempt to overthrow Soviet Russia in 1917–21:

(Translated from the Russian via Google Translate)

Bear in mind that the “they” refers to the principal Allied Powers of the First World War—the U.S., U.K., White Russia, France, Italy, and Japan, including their colonial dependencies. All these powers “ardently sought the fall of the Soviet government and made plans for its fall.” Churchill does not mince words. Basically the Reds were facing a full-scale war imposed on virtually all fronts, backed by the enormous resources of the most powerful empires on the planet. This does not even account for the fact that the Central Powers, notably Imperial Germany, were just as hostile to the Reds as the Allies: in March 1918 the Germans forced the Bolsheviks to cede their most valuable industrial and agricultural assets to the Central Powers, in the vital Caucasian and Ukrainian regions. Up until the Armistice of November the Reds also had to face the massive influx of pro-Entente counterrevolutionary forces as well. Yet we are to believe that the Reds were and are tools of the big bankers and industrialists. Well, my advice to you is: take up your claims with Churchill. Prior to World War I the Rothschild dynasty exercised near-total control over Western finance and hence the levers of power. If they or their ilk were behind Bolshevism, Churchill, being an arch-Zionist, would have known.

But of course, it was the Reds themselves who provoked the West by overthrowing the Provisional Government of Russia in October 1917! They must be to blame!

The fact that the Red Terror was itself a response to Western intervention—that the institution of the Terror in August 1918 was preceded by a massive influx of Western aid to armed counterrevolutionaries—is rarely, if ever, emphasised. The record in fact discloses that the capitalist side provoked the civil war in Russia, that the Reds would have prevailed on their own if not for massive foreign assistance to the Czarist Whites, who had many more officers than men in their ranks. After all, that is why the Whites relied on foreign rather than domestic support. (Incidentally, the exact same scenario has taken place in Syria since 2011: if not for astronomical external support, the anti-Assad forces would have long ceased to exist.) In March the Allied or Entente Powers landed a force at Murmansk, in response to the Bolsheviks’ signing the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk: therefore the intervention was from the outset a hostile act. From this point onward the Allies earnestly bolstered all anti-Soviet forces throughout Russia, using the Bolsheviks’ “peace” with the Central Powers as an excuse—even though Allied interference in Russia continued to accelerate following the Armistice of November 1918. In fact the Whites’ counteroffensives peaked in 1919, culminating in the failed marches on Moscow and Petrograd.

You have clichés on your side. I have actual, historical, verifiable, documentary evidence.

Just more gaslighting and mental gymnastics. And you probably have a million excuses as to why you refuse to move to China, Venezuela or Cuba even though you love socialism so much. You're basically spitting on all the victims of Mao and Stalin. I hope you wake up from your ignorance one day

If the WEF manages to implement their communist utopia, I guess at least you'll be happy, while owning nothing and having no privacy, in line with Marxist-Leninist communism

[Northwest]

On 2/14/2023 at 12:07 PM, Dubilex said:

Just more gaslighting and mental gymnastics. And you probably have a million excuses as to why you refuse to move to China, Venezuela or Cuba even though you love socialism so much.

@Dubilex

The problem with this assertion is that it is yet to define “socialism.” I am referring principally to economics. In general, anti-capitalist, in essence medieval, thought predates Marx, going back to the Bible (cf. Isaiah 23, among other anti-mercantile passages) and its successor, the Qur’ān. One can even find its legacy in the writings of ancient authors such as Aristotle. Anti-capitalism is fundamentally teleological or “pre-Darwinian”: phenomena are said to serve specific, defined purposes. For example, shoes are made to be worn, food to be consumed, etc., not bought and sold for profit. Profit was a form of parasitism because it was not directly linked to purposeful labour. Under feudalism profit and usury were closely linked, so investors such as financiers and their dependents, e.g., merchants, were not recognisable as forming an estate, unlike the nobility, clergy, and peasantry. Wealth was tied to land ownership, e.g., manorialism and self-sufficiency, rather than manufacturing or banking. It is significant that Imam Khomeini’s biggest supporters were among the urban poor and rural landowners, not the wealthy merchants, bankers, and industrialists (bourgeoisie) who supported the Shah. According to Ervand Abrahamian’s Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), Imam Khomeini even mentioned that neither Prophet Muhammad nor Imam Ali was wealthy, and that the Shia clergy had historically lived as the commoners did and did not accumulate wealth (pp. 31–32). Islam opposes atheism, but is not opposed to anti-capitalism per se.

[Dubilex]

4 minutes ago, Northwest said:

@Dubilex

The problem with this assertion is that it is yet to define “socialism.” I am referring principally to economics. In general, anti-capitalist, in essence medieval, thought predates Marx, going back to the Bible (cf. Isaiah 23, among other anti-mercantile passages) and its successor, the Qur’ān. One can even find its legacy in the writings of ancient authors such as Aristotle. Anti-capitalism is fundamentally teleological or “pre-Darwinian”: phenomena are said to serve specific, defined purposes. For example, shoes are made to be worn, food to be consumed, etc., not bought and sold for profit. Profit was a form of parasitism because it was not directly linked to purposeful labour. Under feudalism profit and usury were closely linked, so investors such as financiers and their dependents, e.g., merchants, were not recognisable as forming an estate, unlike the nobility, clergy, and peasantry. Wealth was tied to land ownership, e.g., manorialism and self-sufficiency, rather than manufacturing or banking. It is significant that Imam Khomeini’s biggest supporters were among the urban poor and rural landowners, not the wealthy merchants, bankers, and industrialists (bourgeoisie) who supported the Shah. According to Ervand Abrahamian’s Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), Imam Khomeini even mentioned that neither Prophet Muhammad nor Imam Ali was wealthy, and that the Shia clergy had historically lived as the commoners did and did not accumulate wealth (pp. 31–32). Islam opposes atheism, but is not opposed to anti-capitalism per se.

 

Just more gaslighting and mental gymnastics. 

[Northwest]

27 minutes ago, Dubilex said:

Just more gaslighting and mental gymnastics. 

@Dubilex The following definitely seems to apply to you: ↓

On 2/14/2023 at 5:51 AM, AbdusSibtayn said:

The vast majority of them simply don't read enough.

Discussions involving international relations, economics, social studies, history, literature, philosophy etc are clearly beyond...intellectual wavelength

You don’t engage with the argument, just respond with irrelevant comments about “gaslighting” and “mental gymnastics.” You haven’t disproven anything.

Anti-capitalism is far more than just Marxism. It is quite possible to be anti-capitalist and religious at the same time. Was the medieval Church capitalist?

My argument is not for Marxism per se, but for feudalism, which was similar to many aspects of Marxism except for the fact that it was religious.

Also, what about slavery? Islam permits slavery, and slavery is clearly not capitalist, in that slaves do not own property.

Edited February 16 by Northwest

[guest 2025]

6 hours ago, Dubilex said:

 

Just more gaslighting and mental gymnastics. 

Northwest has built a good reputation around here as a respectable, respectful, and honest person who has a lot of valuable insights to share. We may not agree with him at times (rarely in my case), but I think you are being too harsh in your disagreement in this thread. This is especially strange considering your history of being very polite and open-minded. I think you've misunderstood him for being insincere. May Allah guide us all.

Edited February 16 by guest 2025

[Northwest]

2 hours ago, guest 2025 said:

This is especially strange considering your history of being very polite and open-minded.

To add to this, I must also say that I respect @Dubilex’s positions on a number of other matters. For instance, I do appreciate his strong stance against liberal “woke” ideology and willingness to engage in self-criticism. A lot of Muslims simply fall into the liberal “woke” ID trap by viewing themselves solely as victims of evil white Westerners, thus becoming prey for the “woke” liberal globalists who sponsor BLM, ANTIFA, LBGTQ+I, etc. Sunni Islamists in particular often succumb to this, but so do some Shia Muslims. This allows bad actors such as globalist Zionists to manipulate Muslims’ consciousness like putty. In a way by focussing more on economic factors such as class I am pushing back against the racial, feminist, sodomite, and related ID nonsense. If there must be an economic “left,” an economic left that is focussed solely on economics is preferable.

Despite everything, I still believe that Trump was in some ways a far better president for Muslims than Biden: more honest and largely free of corrosive liberalism. Sadly a lot of pro-Iranian sources, especially in the “reformist” camp, clearly shilled for Biden and the DNC, so that Iran could reenter the JCPOA and then quietly capitulate to the globalist faction. In a perverse way, like a blessing in disguise, Trump actually did Iran a big service by killing General Soleimani, because he weakened the position of the pro-Western reformists, and allowed anti-globalist hardliners to come to power. The liberals in Iran were discredited as a result. In fact I think Trump himself wanted to assassinate General Soleimani simply in order to get rid of his own neocon Zionists (RINOs), who more often than not were allied with liberal Democrats vs. Trump’s nationalist MAGA agenda.

More than anyone else Trump helped free both his country and others from total globalist/NWO control, however temporarily. That’s why the neocon Zionists and liberal globalists have united against him.

Edited February 16 by Northwest

[Dubilex]

On 2/16/2023 at 11:09 PM, Northwest said:

To add to this, I must also say that I respect @Dubilex’s positions on a number of other matters. For instance, I do appreciate his strong stance against liberal “woke” ideology and willingness to engage in self-criticism. A lot of Muslims simply fall into the liberal “woke” ID trap by viewing themselves solely as victims of evil white Westerners, thus becoming prey for the “woke” liberal globalists who sponsor BLM, ANTIFA, LBGTQ+I, etc. Sunni Islamists in particular often succumb to this, but so do some Shia Muslims. This allows bad actors such as globalist Zionists to manipulate Muslims’ consciousness like putty. In a way by focussing more on economic factors such as class I am pushing back against the racial, feminist, sodomite, and related ID nonsense. If there must be an economic “left,” an economic left that is focussed solely on economics is preferable.

Despite everything, I still believe that Trump was in some ways a far better president for Muslims than Biden: more honest and largely free of corrosive liberalism. Sadly a lot of pro-Iranian sources, especially in the “reformist” camp, clearly shilled for Biden and the DNC, so that Iran could reenter the JCPOA and then quietly capitulate to the globalist faction. In a perverse way, like a blessing in disguise, Trump actually did Iran a big service by killing General Soleimani, because he weakened the position of the pro-Western reformists, and allowed anti-globalist hardliners to come to power. The liberals in Iran were discredited as a result. In fact I think Trump himself wanted to assassinate General Soleimani simply in order to get rid of his own neocon Zionists (RINOs), who more often than not were allied with liberal Democrats vs. Trump’s nationalist MAGA agenda.

More than anyone else Trump helped free both his country and others from total globalist/NWO control, however temporarily. That’s why the neocon Zionists and liberal globalists have united against him.

Oh haha, thank you. We may disagree on some issues, but I see that there are more things we have in common than what we disagree one. Regardless of what one may think about capitalism or socialism, we can all agree that our common enemy is the WEF" who are pushing the LGBTQ agenda and trying to provoke racial conflict. While there are many woke shias out there, as we see on this site, sunnis are generally more susceptible to the subversive liberal zionist ideology. Omar Suleiman is an archetypical example of it.

As for Trump, he is far from perfect, but given the choice between Trump or Biden, Trump is by far the lesser of 2 evils. While he was president, the Middle East and the Horn of Africa were largely calm. It's pretty interesting how Ethiopia enjoyed peace and stability during the Trump years, but as soon as Biden took office, another war started in Ethiopia. The thing about Trump is that he was honest and bumbling, he was simply unable to lie or fool anyone. The conservatives and right-wing of the west are generally much better to deal with because they say everything straight to your face.

Biden and his liberal democrats however, are much more insidious and sinister. Slowly but surely they are corrupting muslims from the inside, making muslims complacent and tame, taking the attention away from Israel's atrocities, and make you focus on "muh racism" and the evil yt men instead, when we all know who it is that's actually stoking racial conflict. So overall from a muslim perspective, Trump was a much more manageable president than Biden is

Edited February 20 by Dubilex

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 2/16/2023 at 4:09 PM, Northwest said:

Imam Khomeini even mentioned that neither Prophet Muhammad nor Imam Ali was wealthy, and that the Shia clergy had historically lived as the commoners did and did not accumulate wealth (pp. 31–32). Islam opposes atheism, but is not opposed to anti-capitalism per se.

Hi it doesn't mean that they couldn't benefit from a luxury lifestyle by accumulate wealth

Quote

O Ibn Hunayf, I have come to know that a young man of Basrah invited you to a feast and you leapt towards it. Foods of different colours were being chosen for you and big bowls were being given to you. I never thought that you would accept the feast of a people who turn out the beggars and invite the rich. Look at the morsels you take, leave out that about which you are in doubt and take that about which you are sure that it has been secured lawfully.

Remember that every follower has a leader whom he follows and from the effulgence of whose knowledge he takes light. Realize that your Imam has contented himself with two shabby pieces of cloth out of the (comforts of the) world and two loaves for his meal. Certainly, you cannot do so but at least support me in piety, exertion, chastity and uprightness, because, by Allah, I have not treasured any gold out of your world nor amassed plentiful wealth nor collected any clothes other than the two shabby sheets.

If I wished I could have taken the way leading towards (worldly pleasures like) pure honey, fine wheat and silk clothes but it cannot be that my passions lead me and greed take me to choosing good meals while in the Hijaz or in Yamamah there may be people who have no hope of getting bread or who do not have a full meal. Shall I lie with a satiated belly while around me there may be hungry bellies and thirsty livers? Or shall I be as the poet has said:

It is enough for you to have a disease that you lie with your belly full while around you people may be badly yearning for dried leather.

 

Shall I be content with being called `Amir al-mu 'minin' (The Commander of the Believers), although I do not share with the people the hardships of the world? Or shall I be an example for them in the distresses of life? I have not been created to keep myself busy in eating good foods like the tied animal whose only worry is his fodder or like a loose animal whose activity is to swallow. It fills its belly with its feed and forgets the purpose behind it. Shall I be left uncontrolled to pasture freely, or draw the rope of misguidance or roam aimlessly in the paths of bewilderment?

I see as if one of you would say that if this is what the son of Abi Talib eats then weakness must have made him unfit to fight his foes and encounter the brave. ..........

Quote

Get away from me, O world. Your rein is on your own shoulders as I have released myself from your claws, removed myself of your snares and avoided walking into your slippery places. Where are those whom you have deceived by your jokes? Where are those communities whom you have enticed with your embellishments? They are all confined to graves and hidden in burial places.

By Allah, if you had been a visible personality aud a body capable of feeling, I would have awarded you the penalties fixed by Allah because of the people whom you received through desires and the communities whom you threw into destruction and the rulers whom you consigned to ruin and drove to places of distress after which there is neither going nor returning. Indeed whoever stepped on your slippery place slipped, whoever rode your waves was drowned, and whoever evaded your snares received inward support. He who keeps himself safe from you does not worry even though his affairs may be straitened and the world to him is like a day which is near expiring.

 

 

 

Quote

Get away from me, for, by Allah, I do not bow before you so that you may humiliate me, nor do I let loose the reins for you so that you may drive me away. I swear by Allah an oath wherein I, except for the will of Allah, shall so train my self that it will feel joyful if it gets one loaf for eating, and be content with only salt to season it. I shall let my eyes empty themselves of tears like the stream whose water has flown away. Should `Ali eat whatever he has and fall asleep like the cattle who fill their stomachs from the pasture land and lie down, or as the goats (who) graze, eat the green grass and go into their pen! His eyes may die if he, after long years, follows loose cattle and pasturing animals.

https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-2-letters-and-sayings/letter-45-uthman-ibn-hunayf-al-ansari

Imam Ali after four years of caliphate and rule:
In Kufa, everyone has a decent life: even owners of the lowest jobs eat wheat bread, have a house and shelter, and drink the soft and tasty water  (Euphrates).

Quote

The supreme leader of the revolution gave an important warning about the change in the lifestyle of the officials of the system, a shocking warning that is our standard for judging the officials. Hazrat Agha strongly forbade the authorities from living an aristocratic and luxurious life and said, "In this situation, we should not expect people to look at us as a role model; People, many of whom are deprived of the basics of life... You and I, we are the same students or teachers before the revolution, but now should we have a wedding like the wedding of nobles? Shall we make a house like a noble house? Shall we move like nobles in the streets? What were the nobles like? Because they only shaved their beards, but we have left our beards, is that enough? No, we may become transgerous . By Allah, in the Islamic society, it is possible that there will be an transgerous. From the honorable verse:And when We desire to destroy a town We command its affluent ones [to obey Allah]. But they commit transgression in it, and so the word becomes due against it, and We destroy it utterly. (16)

https://snn.ir/fa/news/622104/صحبت‌های-جنجالی-وزیر-بهداشت-و-نامه-تاریخی-امیرالمومنین-ع

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/17:16

 

Quote

It is a great danger that some officials of the system are at the legendary peaks of wealth of several thousand billion tomans, and then, in the position of justifying their aristocratic lifestyle, they seek religious justification and  luxury show off. Undoubtedly, the lives of our elders, present and past, are an important pillar of people's trust in the Islamic system, and the existence of such disasters raises alarm bells.

 

https://www.jahanvatani.ir/امام-علی-ع-و-نان،-مسکن-و-رفاه-مردم/

[Dubilex]

 

This is what the war criminal Tony Blair is doing these days. Apparently he got rewarded for what he did in Iraq

[Northwest]

On 2/23/2023 at 3:38 PM, Haji 2003 said:

Yes, the fundamental issue seems to be one of the power of capital over that of individuals. It's thoroughly undemocratic. I need to mug up on Islamic political theory.

@Haji 2003

This definitely relates to my arguments about concentration of wealth, if not capitalism in general, in this thread. Beyond abolishing usury and other destructive practices, I think that humans need to devise an alternative socioeconomic order, one that precludes the rise of economic elites that can control society through, among other things, groups and/or institutions such as the WEF, well-connected political parties, and so on. Capital is being placed above and beyond the welfare of society.

@Dubilex, you might be interested in reading the following:

On 2/21/2023 at 9:15 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Hi it doesn't mean that they couldn't benefit from a luxury lifestyle by accumulate wealth

@Ashvazdanghe

This definitely seems to go against the asceticism of the Imams and Prophets in general, as well as the sentiments of, among others, Imam Khomeini:

Quote

The supreme leader of the revolution gave an important warning about the change in the lifestyle of the officials of the system, a shocking warning that is our standard for judging the officials. Hazrat Agha strongly forbade the authorities from living an aristocratic and luxurious life and said, "In this situation, we should not expect people to look at us as a role model

Obviously Islam, and religion generally, does not want people to be totally deprived of sustenance, lest they be forced to steal; but at the same time it clearly argues against wantonness and accumulation in general, beyond the basic constituents that help man subsist and procreate, that is, food, shelter/clothing, and marriage. I think that man should strive for the basics, but not necessarily more: he should shun living beyond his needs as well as his means, thereby controlling his desires/lusts. Hence “neither poverty (=absolute destitution) nor riches.” My viewpoint is that man should strive to live a Spartan, self-sufficient, spiritual lifestyle, and outline this kind of vision for society. Societies tend to become morally corrupt and effeminate as soon as they become wealthy and prosperous.

[Silas]

4 hours ago, Northwest said:

@Haji 2003

This definitely relates to my arguments about concentration of wealth, if not capitalism in general, in this thread. Beyond abolishing usury and other destructive practices, I think that humans need to devise an alternative socioeconomic order, one that precludes the rise of economic elites that can control society through, among other things, groups and/or institutions such as the WEF, well-connected political parties, and so on. Capital is being placed above and beyond the welfare of society.

@Dubilex, you might be interested in reading the following:

@Ashvazdanghe

This definitely seems to go against the asceticism of the Imams and Prophets in general, as well as the sentiments of, among others, Imam Khomeini:

Obviously Islam, and religion generally, does not want people to be totally deprived of sustenance, lest they be forced to steal; but at the same time it clearly argues against wantonness and accumulation in general, beyond the basic constituents that help man subsist and procreate, that is, food, shelter/clothing, and marriage. I think that man should strive for the basics, but not necessarily more: he should shun living beyond his needs as well as his means, thereby controlling his desires/lusts. Hence “neither poverty (=absolute destitution) nor riches.” My viewpoint is that man should strive to live a Spartan, self-sufficient, spiritual lifestyle, and outline this kind of vision for society. Societies tend to become morally corrupt and effeminate as soon as they become wealthy and prosperous.

It is when we elevate an economic or ideological principal above everything else, that is when we get into trouble. 

"Socialism" like "Capitalism" is not only an economic system, but an ideology. Ayn Rand elevated capitalism to an ethos. The Communists elevated socialism to an ethos and a guiding principal of life.

Our markets and trinkets do not define us anymore than our labors in field or factory. 

Allah does not see "classes"

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

8 hours ago, Northwest said:

This definitely seems to go against the asceticism of the Imams and Prophets in general, as well as the sentiments of, among others, Imam Khomeini:

Hi no because definition of asceticism is different in Christanity & Islam which ascetism in Christanity based on being a sitting duck without doing any useful activity likewise forbidding financial activities & doing farming & other activities just for fullfilling personal minimum personal needs but on the other hand asceticism of the Imams and Prophets in general is based on doing any common activity likewise financial activities & business & farming & etc in similar fashion of community for fullfilling good needs of community while Imams and Prophets have been refraining from keeping & hoarding anything from thsese activities for themselves while they have been spending whole of  produced wealth from their activities for welfare of muslim community which they just have  fulfiling their needs from minimum amout of wage while they could benefit from utmost of income.

8 hours ago, Northwest said:

Obviously Islam, and religion generally, does not want people to be totally deprived of sustenance, lest they be forced to steal; but at the same time it clearly argues against wantonness and accumulation in general, beyond the basic constituents that help man subsist and procreate, that is, food, shelter/clothing, and marriage. I think that man should strive for the basics, but not necessarily more: he should shun living beyond his needs as well as his means, thereby controlling his desires/lusts. Hence “neither poverty (=absolute destitution) nor riches.” My viewpoint is that man should strive to live a Spartan, self-sufficient, spiritual lifestyle, and outline this kind of vision for society. Societies tend to become morally corrupt and effeminate as soon as they become wealthy and prosperous.

This is a good & balanced viewpoint from you.

[Northwest]

13 hours ago, Silas said:

It is when we elevate an economic or ideological principal above everything else, that is when we get into trouble.

@Silas

Well, Islam, like religion in general, is fundamentally ideological. It is, among other things, an ideological principle in and of itself. When applied systematically, it is an ideology of ideologies, conditioning all other ideologies. Moreover, Islam, like religion in general, is all-encompassing, so it certainly encompasses the economic sphere, in addition to all other spheres. The problem with your argument is that every system is ultimately based on an ideological premise or foundation. Also, people need an ideology in order to live and thrive. Idealism motivates some of man’s highest spiritual ideals. (Of course, it can also motivate some of his worst, but one still needs idealism to live a good, spiritual life. The fact that idealism has also produced totalitarianism is no excuse to forego it.)

13 hours ago, Silas said:

"Socialism" like "Capitalism" is not only an economic system, but an ideology. Ayn Rand elevated capitalism to an ethos. The Communists elevated socialism to an ethos and a guiding principal of life.

This is true, but I don’t see your point. It is simply impossible to become totally anti-ideological. As mentioned previously, religion, being a way of life, is also ideological.

13 hours ago, Silas said:

Our markets and trinkets do not define us anymore than our labors in field or factory.

I disagree with this. Those “markets and trinkets” have an underlying ethos that conditions human behaviour. A medieval economic system, or feudalism, has different values from those of a modern capitalist economy. The values of the medieval Church took on a distinctive form in practice, owing to the socioeconomic conditions that prevailed at the time. The Church in the age of capitalism also adapted itself to the new conditions, as the historical example of Protestantism illustrates. The medieval ban on usury evaporated as soon as capitalism arose in the Renaissance, for instance. Also, if “markets and trinkets” truly are irrelevant, then I suppose that you would be equally okay with a socialist economy as a market-based one, right, so long as religion is respected as well?

13 hours ago, Silas said:

Allah does not see "classes"

This comes dangerously close to legitimising the practices of wealthy groupings such as the Rockefeller dynasty, Klaus Schwab, et al. After all, if these elites are “charitable,” there is no grounds for coercive means to oppose globalist institutions such as the WEF, which of course are backed by the moneyed elite, including the financial. The elites of the WEF probably appreciate this kind of mindset, because a person who discards the role of class probably will not oppose the system that benefits the elites behind the WEF and its ilk. I’m not in favour of a particular economic system per se, but I am opposed to any system that creates a parasitical, idle class of intellectuals, bankers, and merchants who engage in social engineering on behalf of their class’s elitist, globalist self-interest.

If Klaus Schwab, for instance, were forced to work as a simple farmer, artisan, or productive labourer, he wouldn’t be engaged in the shenanigans that he is. If there are good bankers and merchants out there, I would certainly like to meet them, because money is power and the global power-structure is certainly opposed to the average man. It isn’t the government that opposes big capital, it is big capital that uses government to oppress the masses. Capital is being used as a means to impose harmful agendas such as depopulation, LBGTQ+I, extreme feminism, outsourcing, neoliberal economics, and so on. It is responsible for everything that the authentic Right and Left justly oppose, both in the social and economic spheres. I am simply opposed to this current system.

9 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

likewise financial activities & business & farming & etc in similar fashion of community for fullfilling good needs of community while Imams and Prophets have been refraining from keeping & hoarding anything from thsese activities for themselves while they have been spending whole of  produced wealth from their activities for welfare of muslim community which they just have  fulfiling their needs from minimum amout of wage while they could benefit from utmost of income.

@Ashvazdanghe

Well, that’s precisely my point. They live very simple, austere lifestyles and are not “stingy” about spending their wealth on behalf of others. Probably this kind of mindset would also be opposed to profiteering in general. After all, why not use one’s wealth to provide free religious education and housing on behalf of the Islamic community? Thinking like a businessman tends to make people stingy and reluctant to invest in “unprofitable” activities. Unlike some people here, I am simply objecting to the mindset that implicitly presumes greater virtue on behalf of the banker, merchant, or industrialist than the farmer, artisan, or labourer. This is the same kind of mindset that idle, middle-class, university-educated intellectuals employ to look down upon so-called “deplorable” blue-collar workers such as those who refused to support Soros-backed Democrats. The same kind of mindset also presumes that the wealthy should not be “forced” to do the right thing, but only asked to contribute “voluntarily.” Personally, I am not in favour of taxing the wealthy, because the tax-codes will always favour the wealthy elites, while shifting the burden of taxation onto the lower classes. I am interested in more fundamental changes.