World Hijab Day - A Celebration Of Muslim Authoritarianism And Feminist Hypocrisy

My Recent Posts

Someone suggested we make WB the come to place for stories the media will not report. The 48 hour rule is a bit on an obstacle to that, but it's not a bad idea. Here we go then.

 

Today, February 1st is apparently World Hijab Day. This is the latest demonstration of the abject stupidity of liberal feminists and inevitably has its very own hashtag: #StrongInHijab. Most of the usual suspects, the self righteous virtue signallers and professional hypocrites, politicians showbiz luvvies and media sheeple are jumping on the bandwagon, in the name of "Womens' right to choose."


What makes this a day which ranks as one of the most sickening displays of virtue signalling is that privileged middle-class Western feminists are lining up to display their multicultural credentials by donning a hijab as a fashionable symbol of liberation. In order to be seen to support Islamic human rights 110% pretend they to be ignorant of the brave women in Iran and other places in the Middle East where women are literally risking their lives to remove the hijab. To them it a hated symbol of oppression. The Iranian regime has decreed it compulsory for a woman to cover every part of their body apart from their face, and wearing a hijab is thus compulsory.


Yes on this very day, while western poseurs are fighting for Muslim womens' right to wear the hijab, in Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE and all around the Islamic world women are being stoned or flogged for demanding the right NOT to wear the hijab. Punishments for removing a hijab in Islamic societies can be brutal – Islamist regimes are known to physically beat women for non-compliance with their dress codes. This is true not only in the Middle East but is increasingly becoming accepted in the name of multiculturalism in the West.


British Prime Minister Theresa May has joined in the chorus of the self-righteous and added her voice to the celebrations. Teresa The Appeaser told the House of Commons that "a woman should be able to wear whatever she wants". As ever the very worst kind of hypocrite, May makes absolutely no mention of women who do not want to wear a hijab and are regularly arrested, imprisoned or somehow forced to by huband, Imam or religious police for not wearing one.



RELATED POSTS:

France leads celebrity pushback against '#MeToo'
Two Police Officers Escape Violent Death At The Hands Of Immigrant Mob On New Year’s Eve
Fired Engineer Damore Sues Google For Discrimination Against White Male Conservatives

Feminist hypocrites

Comments

Doug Plumb Added Feb 1, 2018 - 6:48pm
More than one actual establishment doc has suggested that Leftism may be an actual mental disorder (Leo Rossiter). Strong propaganda over periods of time reshapes our plastic minds into having actual disorders (Political Ponerology) - its an esoteric book, older copies are worth more than people bought them for in the early 2000's.
  It really and truly is estonishing what people can be made to do or believe. They need people like this to operate the fema camps. Scary - is there anything they cannot be made to do or think?
  Propaganda is really something people need to educate themselves about. You never really appreciate its power until you start deprogramming and many people cannot do this.
opher goodwin Added Feb 1, 2018 - 6:59pm
Doug - so fascism is the new sanity?
opher goodwin Added Feb 1, 2018 - 7:01pm
Personally I'd do away with all the trappings of archaic religions - Hijabs, burqas, crosses, strapping bibles to your head, you name it. All daft responses to manmade fictions. They are all equally daft.
Mircea Negres Added Feb 2, 2018 - 1:31am
I stand to be corrected, but I think France is the only European country which has been fighting against this primitive nonsense with laws against women wearing those damned ninja outfits in public.
 
Er, Opher, fascism is NOT the new sanity, though if you know a little about human nature, you'll understand that it often follows Newton's law like a pendulum- unless kept in the middle, a swing to the left will eventually be balanced by a swing to the right. 
Shane Laing Added Feb 2, 2018 - 3:28am
The funny thing is men also have a dress code. Men should not wear tight clothes or anything see through. They must not wear silk or anything gold.  Funny how many muslim men wear tight jeans, t shirts, gold watches,  the colour white (the best of colours preserved for the dead) etc and yet they do not come in for criticism
Shane Laing Added Feb 2, 2018 - 3:30am
Forget that bit about wearing white. I got that bit wrong
Doug Plumb Added Feb 2, 2018 - 5:29am
@Opher re "Doug - so fascism is the new sanity?  "
 
What is fascism, exactly Opher ? Do you know ?
 
@Mircea re the pendulum. The pendulum has swung to the nuttiest end of the spectrum for leftism. When it swings to the nuttier part of the right, be as afraid as you are now. I know I am. But the Left is always the most dangerous, they are killing S. African farmers now, it will be the sane among us next. 100 million bodies from last century, I wonder what the count will be this century. So far I think its under 100,000 but it won't stay that way for long.
  Even the Right is under a leftist spell, fighting all these wars for Israel. Its really a fake right. "Progressive conservatives" are what Canadians have. Next we will invent dry water.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Feb 2, 2018 - 5:34am
Yes on this very day, while western poseurs are fighting for Muslim womens' right to wear the hijab, in Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE and all around the Islamic world women are being stoned or flogged for demanding the right NOT to wear the hijab.
 
Can you quote a law or a credible eye witness account that links flogging or stoning to a woman's refusal to wear a headscarf?
Mircea Negres Added Feb 2, 2018 - 6:32am
Doug, I hear you. Both extremes are bad, but indeed the Left is by far the worst- and I estimate what may happen in South Africa could lead to 900.000 deaths in 2-3 weeks and end in a huge tragedy for everyone.
opher goodwin Added Feb 2, 2018 - 8:30am
Doug - a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
Glad to be of help.
Sounds a bit like Trump doesn't it?
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 2, 2018 - 12:34pm
Oh bugger, how do I deal with Autumn's stricter enforcement of the three comment rule? I hate these comments that answer several people's points.
 
Doug:
"Strong propaganda over periods of time reshapes our plastic minds into having actual disorders"
This is a principle that was espoused by The Frankfurt School (which those authoritarians who style themselves 'the left' deny the existence of, but it's formal title was The Institute For Social Research. The Marxist members of this group proposed the use of propaganda and psychology to suppress debate and dissent. Eventually such social programming would, if it did not encounter resistance, generate a populace with behaviour patterns similar to Pavlov's Dogs.
Fortunately the social scientists of the Frankfurt School greatly underestimated the intelligence and independence of the working class, due to their own Marxist beliefs having conditioned them to think of 'the masses' as the lumpen proleteriat, a homogenous mass of uneducated semi morons. Thus the overlooked the fact that 'the masses are actually made up of millions of individuals.
 
Opher,
"so fascism is the new sanity?" 
No mate, fascism belongs to the extremes of left and right, sanity is the preserve of those who resist propaganda, think for themselves and question everything.
 
Mircea
" I think France is the only European country which has been fighting against this primitive nonsense with laws against women wearing those damned ninja outfits in public."
You may be right, I know of none which has banned the hijab (a headscarf which is designed to leave no hair exposed) because there is no good reason to stop women wearing headcoverings. Several countries have introduced laws against full face cover (the niquab or burqa) in banks or public buildings.
So it may be that the screeching sisters are getting their knickers in a twist over nothing as usual, as there it little evidence that anyone, (apart from Opher?) would stop them from wearing a traditional head dress that leaves the face visible.
The objections to full face coverings is that they could easily hide a beard full of weapons of mass destruction.
 
Shane
"Men should not wear tight clothes or anything see through."
You will not find many men in the north of England disagreeing with that, and women will be solid in support of it. I suppose some clown might claim it's homophobic. Banning silk or gold would not be popular but I see plenty of Muslims laden with bling.
 
Dave Volek Added Feb 2, 2018 - 12:54pm
Nice Article Benjamen
 
There is indeed a paradox. Maybe there is a feminist to give their side of the issue.
 
 
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 2, 2018 - 1:40pm
Ben, you will have to have a comment to yourself, it seems wasteful in the circumstances but your comment is of such astounding stupidity proximity to it would demean other contributors.

Yes of course I can quote a law or cite an instance that links flogging or stoning to not wearing a headscarf. But I'm not going to because these stories have been widely reported in mainstream media as well as all over the web. If you can't be bothered to read, watch or listen to news I don't see it as being my responsibility to make you well enough informed to participate in my threads.

I could have posted a video (with English subtitles) from a UAE news channel of a stoning but chose not to link to it as that kind of thing only attracts those with a prurient interest in violence.  It shows a woman buried to her neck in sand, weeping as an Imam reads out the charge against her, of being 'immodestly dressed' (which means having her hair uncovered, she'd have been whisked away by the religious police and never seen again), while a group of men wielding stones around the size of a baseball or an orange wait eagerly.

Once the Imam gives the signal and the stones begin to fly. Judging by the number of direct hits when only the head is exposed as a target those lads must have been practicing. I don't know how long the stoning goes on for but one hit on a vulnerable spot could be fatal. The penalty for dressing immodestly is not death but hey, if the woman dies its the will of god so no - one cares much.  
As this is the second successive thread of my in which to have made absolutely stupid challenges to my references regarding well known aspects of religious news or history by asking for 'one single source' when I am very well aware of that weary old tactic used by defenders of religious misinformation (after deliberately wasting my time you will only dismiss the source chosen from the many available on some spurious religious grounds as you did in the previous thread, claiming that the Torah does not tell the same story as The bible Old Testament) so I am content to trust the wisdom of my other readers and let them decided the value of my posts.

Other readers: If that seems a bit harsh, sorry but when somebody tries to tell me that the Jewish version of certain biblical books is not as full of violence as the Christian version, when I know full well from my reading of ancient history that the fairy stories the Jewish faith claims as it's history have NO BASIS IN FACT whatsoever, and then starts trying to twish my words and undermine the points I have made, I seldom react well.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 2, 2018 - 1:43pm
Mircea, as you say, both extremes are bad, however the atrocities of Stalin and Mao far exceed those of Hitler and Mussolini in numbers if not in brutality.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 2, 2018 - 2:26pm
Opher, on your definition of fascism as: "a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government
Actually that's Naziism. Or Stalinism or Maoism, or Leninism.
The term 'fascism' comes from ancient Rome and refers to the Roman symbol of authority, The Fasces, depicted as an axe with a bundle of sticks bound around its handle, symbolizing the unbreakable power of the central authority. The symbol still pops up in some unexpected (or expected maybe places, like this image from the US Congress (dunno which House)
 
There is no hard agreement as to the definition of fascism, it has simply become the generic term for authoritarianism backed up by a militarised police force. Mussolinis Fascisti were the first political movement to claim fascism as part of their philosophy so perhaps Il Duce's definition is the one we should work with. And it does not define fascism as left or right wing but simply authoritarianism. The definition is quite short, having only three points.

1."Everything in the state". The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.
2."Nothing outside the state". The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.
3."Nothing against the state". Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.
 
Simples.
Mircea Negres Added Feb 2, 2018 - 3:01pm
Ian, when you said "both extremes are bad, however the atrocities of Stalin and Mao far exceed those of Hitler and Mussolini in numbers if not in brutality.", I agreed, especially when you put those two fuckers together. Man, those really were monsters walking the face of the Earth...
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 2, 2018 - 4:10pm
Ben, Oops two of your comments gone. Sorry, didn't read them. Why? Because I don't want your idiotic rants about fairy tales in my threads, everybody else manages to keep it intelligent.
You started this when in response to your remark about all the places Jews had been kicked out of I suggested in a tongue in cheek response that maybe it was because host nations don't like it when a bunch of refugees turn up and say "We're God's chosen people, you have to do things how we say now."
You asked me to cite, with links to my source, one instance of the Jews doing that. Now as even a complete idiot would understand that comment was never meant to be read literally and I did not think you are a complete idiot, I was somewhat surprised that you knew so little of Jewish history.
So as you had been ill mannered enough to try to undermine my point (I could have gone on at length about how medieval Jewish communities in Europe would riot against false gods, desecrate temples etc.) I decided to wind you up by reminding you of god's exhortations to is followers to kill unbelievers. OK you didn't like it. TOUGH. That thread is dead.
But then you come in my next threat asking me to cite examples of an Islamic law (Sharia) when what I referred to has been widely reported in mainstream media. I was wrong, you are a complete idiot. It seems that rather than researching the KNOWN history of the middle east and the power shifts between the great empires, you choose to take that bunch mash up of multicultural myths and fairy stories as factual history.
In that case I have nothing to say to you and no interest in anything you say. If you want to write rebuttals of anything I post please do it on your own page. Any further comments from you here will be deleted.
RobL_V2 Added Feb 2, 2018 - 9:02pm
The irony, no the folly of Leftists demonstrated yet again. They want everyone to wear hijab to celebrate islam (a religion exceedingly few understand) but these are the same lunatics who shame women who practice yoga (most of whom are liberal mind you) as racist for doing so because they don't understand the culture it came from and thus are appropriating for their own white privileged use.
 
https://www.dailywire.com/news/
 
So multiculturalism is to be forced upon you, and if you disagree you are a racist, however if you participate in it, you are a white supremacist??
 
Insanity... and we pay taxes to pay these people to teach our children??
 
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 3, 2018 - 8:36am
Great article, Ian. I am heartened to find another who understands the insidious role of that Frankfurt school.  Are you familiar with Noel Annan's Our Age ? Keen insights into this 
Doug Plumb Added Feb 3, 2018 - 9:29am
@Ian Thorpe, I found this on Facebook:
"Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or worse, when they are required to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to."
 
Theodore Dalrymple
RobL_V2 Added Feb 3, 2018 - 10:15am
@Doug - I recently have become aware of Jordan K Peterson and his emergence in Canada and really the entire North American scene. It is to the point you articulate that he has made his stand. He will not allow the Canadian government to compel, coerce, or force him to speak as the government dictates. If you are not familiar with him, all his immense wisdom erudition and rational mild mannered approach is available on YouTube. 
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 3, 2018 - 11:25am
Mircea, I guess you know more about life under a communist regime than any of us. As well as reading Solzhenitsyn and other books about life in Soviet Russia I've talked to people from Hungary, Czechosolvakia and Poland. All of them had little to say that was good about communist rule.
Socialists will say this was not true socialism. I remind them of Austrian economist Josef Schumpeter's warning that socialism always leads to fascism.
Though socialist movements may start off with good intenrions, the flaw in Marx's plan for a perfect society is that it ignores human nature. Thus when it becomes clear people will not willingly give up their freedom, things start to fall apart and militarism is introduced as the only way of keeping control.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 3, 2018 - 11:37am
RobL_V2,
The ability of liberal moral relativists to hold completely opposing views simultaneously would be comical if these people were not so dangerous because they have infiltrated the institutions of state.

I've often pointed out to British left wing and liberal activists that to demand we tolerate and adjust to accommodate Islamic traditions while claiming to be feminists or supporters of feminism is ridiculous. After years of campaigning for 'women's rights' they are now demanding that we accept Muslims have the right to beat their wives, force their daughters to marry men of the father's choosing, and treat their women as property because in the name of multiculturalism and diversity we must 'respect' different cultures.
It's insane.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 3, 2018 - 11:44am
Doug Plumb, that's a great quotation and sums up politically correct thinking perfectly. I only know of Theodore Dalrymple (aka Anthony Daniels) as a medical writer but I can see it will be worth looking at his political writing.
Frosty Wooldridge Added Feb 3, 2018 - 12:57pm
"Any culture that will not defend itself against displacement through mass immigration faces extinction. That includes both time-tested and successful cultures. Embracing diversity results in cultural suicide. America’s multicultural path guarantees its destruction via cultural clashes and conflict with Islam, Mexican and African cultures that diametrically oppose American culture. The more diverse a country, the more destructive and broken-down its future. The more people, the more it destroys its quality of life and standard of living. The more it adds  immigrants, the more destruction to its environment. The more it imports refugees, the faster America, Canada, Europe and Australia lose their own ability to function and worse, their identities. Exponential growth of any civilization leads to ultimate collapse. You see it in Africa, India and China today. You will see it in Europe, Canada, Australia and America in the coming years, “IF" Western countries don't stop all forms of immigration.“ Frosty Wooldridge, 6 continent world bicycle traveler, witness to what’s coming to Western countries as to endless refugee immigration.
 
Dayanand Saraswati, Indian sage, said in 1883, "Having thus given a cursory view of the Koran, I lay it before the sensible person with the purpose that they should know what kind of a book the Koran is. I have no hesitation to say that it cannot be the work of either God or of a learned man, nor can it be a book of knowledge. Here its very vital defect has been exposed with the object that people may not waste their life falling into its imposition. The Koran is the result of ignorance, the source of animalization of human beings, a fruitful cause of destroying peace, an incentive to war, and propagator of hostility among men and a promoter of suffering in society. As to defect of repetition, the Koran is its store."
 
 
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 3, 2018 - 3:32pm
TBH, I am indeed familiar with "Our Age", though I have not read it in full (extracts were published in a UK mag years ago, it was published around 1990 I think,) I recall that for a man of the elite Annan was attuned to the absurdities of their assumptions of superiority as he was to what was going on in the factories and offices of our cities, not so much in their lives, but how the actions of the elites, politicians, business leaders and media figures affected them on a large scale.
There's a lot to say about that; how elitists socialists, seeing that there would always be more working class voters than middle and upper class combined use The Fabian Society to hijack The Labour Movement, the way that as the old elite on inbred congenital idiots declined a new meritocratic elite emerged from the universities and tried to take on the mantle of moral guardians, the failure of politicial leaders to deal with Britain's rapid decline from a leading world power before WW2 to "The sick man of Europe in the 1970s," and so on.

And through it all of course is a constant thread, the rise and rise of Frankfurt School thinking. We should be able to get a few threads out of it between us.
Doug Plumb Added Feb 3, 2018 - 4:57pm
re " He will not allow the Canadian government to compel, coerce, or force him to speak as the government dictates. If you are not familiar with him, all his immense wisdom erudition and rational mild mannered approach is available on YouTube.   "
 
Careful with Peterson, he would have some of us locked up after an inquisition. According to him you should not lawfully be permitted to question the holocaust. He is another lefty, a "rino" like guy.
Thomas Napers Added Feb 4, 2018 - 5:50am
Like me, I doubt anyone else who read this article, knew there was such a thing as World Hijab day.  I bet most people don’t know what a Hijab is.  Accordingly, to claim the day is supported by liberal feminists is coming from where the sun doesn’t shine.  If there were a prominent liberal feminist who felt this was a day to be celebrated, I might be persuaded to agree with you.  However, the fact there is such a day and just about all liberals and feminists (everyone really) did nothing to celebrate it, simply means one should get the opposite takeaway as the one you’re trying to portray in this article. 
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 4, 2018 - 8:24am
Ian - that would encompass another thread entirely, one worthy of exploration I agree. I have compiled some research on the Frankfurt Exiles and their long reach into academia spanning the decades. Their fruits have been born in the political and social sciences and have gone on to infect the broader body politic. Annan chronicled much of the absurdity which resulted from this school of thought pervading the institutions of post-war Britain, as you have brilliantly summarized above. I have noted that there is a parallel that follows in the US, though separated by some years. Where this took root between the wars in Britain it did not really begin to gain traction in the US until post-war.
Alinsky is the offspring of Frankfurt. Kurt Vonnegut's Oberon Bergeron was penned in the late fifties, an observation of the pretzel logic that was increasingly espoused in American academic circles. All of that fertile ground was tilled to accept the seeds sown by sixties radicalism, which in turn has populated and propagated the academic realm in perpetuity. Likewise politics, journalism, and in more recent years even the sciences have been brought to heel to this nonsensical orthodoxy.
I own a hard cover copy, acquired just a couple years after publication, which was indeed 1990.  Chapter 15, The Impact of the German Renaissance, provides a virtual roadmap of the Frankfurt school and it's path into western thought 
wsucram15 Added Feb 4, 2018 - 10:36am
Interesting pov., but cant you find something else to criticize but women and their decisions to stand up for other women being beaten?  There are many Muslim women here in US, so its not just white American women marching about something they have no knowledge of..
Thanks for your perspective
RobL_V2 Added Feb 4, 2018 - 11:03am
@Doug, Peterson is no Lefty.,he is Canadian, Canadian are a bit less independent minded than Americans. So he has no problem with government proscribing some speech if its for the better good. This is along the lines of stopping people from yelling Fire in a theater not being free speech issue. Now I'm 100% opposed to government proscribing speech (not the fire theater thing but that is already a crime). Political speech must be free. Peterson however distinctly states the Left is looking to compel people to speak as they dictate. This of course is on a whole other level. Anyway he is on the right in the sense he is a conservative seeking to protect the ideal of western civilization. He is an enemy of most of the Left and the far right. He's a OK in my book. He is the epitome of Classical Liberalism. We need more like him.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 4, 2018 - 11:40am
Frosty, thank you for that insightful comment. Many people in the west do not have the slightest clue of how wide the divisions between the values of our world and the values of the Islamic world are. For decades we have seen the best that the Islamic nations have, doctors, engineers, scientists, writers, educated and adaptable people who understand that when away from one's own nation and culture it is necessary to follow the laws and customs of your hosts.
The kind of people our elites are bringing in now make it clear they find our ways of life unacceptable and do not hesitate to use any means available to impose their values on us.
It is a recipe for social disaster.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 4, 2018 - 11:58am
Napers, first you say "Like me, I doubt anyone else who read this article, knew there was such a thing as World Hijab day."
then you add
"However, the fact there is such a day and just about all liberals and feminists (everyone really) did nothing to celebrate it, simply means one should get the opposite takeaway as the one you’re trying to portray in this article.
So you believe yourself the thought leader for the western world? Had you look in depth at the link I provided you would have seen endorsements of the event from prominent female liberals. But as you choose to comment on topics you cannot be bothered to inform yourself about, I'll show you a few samples of the "takeaway" most of liberal media actually took away from World Hijab Day:
BBC news
Hijab for a day: Non-Muslim women who try the headscarf
International Business Times
World Hijab Day: Why I encourage non-Muslims to wear a hijab for one day
Huffpost
World Hijab Day: Finding Myself Under a Veil
CNN
World Hijab Day encourages women to try covering up
About Islam
World hijab Day
Breitbart London
Islamic Groups Push ‘World Hijab Day’ to Undermine Western Opposition
 
There are hundreds more articles and features in English language publications alone. And most are left leaning sites exhorting women to try wearig a hijab and discover how liberating it is.
The takeaway from my article then, for those who have bothered to inform themselves is:
"OK so it's world hijab day, who gives a damn; just another instance of virtue signalling liberals trying to force the values of a primitive, savage, misogyinistic middle eastern religion on the west in the name of multi - culturalism."
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 4, 2018 - 12:11pm
period. end of story. Next?
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 4, 2018 - 12:43pm
Burghal - thanks for that little comment, it lets me carry on without encountering the chilly winds of Autumn. I've tended to lay off The Frankfurt School philosophy and its influence in every aspect of modern life, because some politically correct idiot will usually tell me, "It's just a conspiracy theory."
This conditioned (or programmed) response to criticism is typical cultural Marxist reaction and very similar and very similar to the response of medieval Roman catholic priests when somebody pointed out that "all that stuff about dry biscuit and watered wine turning into the flesh and blood of The Christ, it's all bollocks isn't it, I mean come on, who would believe that crap."
Anyone who made such a comment was toast (literally,) and I'm often struck by the way modern liberal and left wing thinking is taking on some aspects of religious thinking it one of the most dangerous aspects of the direction in which we are being taken.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 4, 2018 - 1:14pm
Jeanne, you miss the point (as usual). Nobody is trying to stop Muslim women wearing the hijab if they so choose. Any woman should have the right to adopt the moonfaced look than comes from wrapping the head and face entirely whether it is for religious or fashion reasons.
What I, and others who have pointed out the hypocrisy of western women protesting in support of "womens' right to wear the hijab," when that right is not being threatened. (The Niquab and Burqa are very different propositions.)
There are two levels of hypocrisy here, first the protesting over a problem that does not exist, the eagerness to defend Muslim womens choice of headgear in the west, then the deafening silence over women in Iran, Afghanista, Saudi Arabia, Yemen etc. (see Opher's hijab post) who risk brutal punishments, even death, for refusing to wear the hijab or some form of restrictive head covering when commanded to by MEN.
Your position seems a tad confused to me. If your claim to support women's rights is to be credible they you ought to be supporting the brave women in Muslim societies who are defying Sharia Law in all its brutality to fight for the freedom to choose what they wear. Let's hear from you on that. Oh but it will involve criticising the cause du jour Islam and the men who control it. Bit of a dilemma perhaps?
Leroy Added Feb 4, 2018 - 2:15pm
Thanks so much, Ian, for your insightful article and in particularly for your comments that followed.  Thank you also for policing your thread to keep it on subject.  Between your comments and those of TBH, I learned something.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 4, 2018 - 2:47pm
Cheers Leroy, while involved here I've often learned from your comments and those of many other people too. In an ideal world people who have little knowledge of a topic or who are only interested in pushing their own agenda would show restraint and not try to turn threads to discussion of their own obsessions.
Free speech relies on self discipline.
Doug Plumb Added Feb 4, 2018 - 3:05pm
I think we should talk about propaganda. I did a post a while back on the subject but I see there are a few people that could really add some content that were not here back then.
  People really do not know the power of it, making it much more dangerous than it has to be. Even people who know about it know they have to be careful. No one is immune from it.
  Talking about propaganda and mind control is about the most important thing we can discuss.
  I've read Chomsky, Ellul and a book called Political Ponerology which was quite good. The short book about Madison Ave by Bernays was good, but not deep enough to explain the psychology in any depth.
  John McMurtry from Guelph U has done some work on "The Ruling Group Mind".
  I wonder if we can try and start deprogramming poor Opher.
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 5:41am


I wonder if we can try and start deprogramming poor Opher.









 
Rhetorical question, I assume? :)
 






The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 5:43am
As to the original topic here I think that Opher is on the same page, more or less
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 5:47am
Ian -  would you object to communicating on this whole Frankfurt School offline from here?  I have dusted off some of my old materials and am looking to put together a more detailed post on the topic. I've been called a conspiracy theorist before. The source of these should be enough to discredit the assertion in most cases :)
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:59am
Doug, we should certainly address the way propaganda is being used by vested interests from both ends of the political spectrum. As you say, even people who are aware of how it is being used are not immune to the effects.
Who knows, if enough of us try to make this a go to site for off-message news, views and discussion we might yet make Autum's dream come true.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:00pm
TBH,
Yes, on this issue Opher is singing off the same songsheet. There may be hope for him yet.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:10pm
Burghal, go global with the Frankfurt School? I'd be happy to, have you anywhere in mind? I have my own sites but have been neglecting them recently due to my Mother's end-of-life decline. Me, my brother and sister along with her doctor and the care home staff have though she was a goner several times but she is holding on, which necessitates regular trips to north Lancashire (and lots of dinners in the bistro pubs that line the old road, a more congenial journey than the motorway).
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:29pm
Well then friend that is where you need to live for now. Thanks for taking part of your time free with us here on WB.
 
I raise my pint of bitters to your congenial journey. 
Flying Junior Added Feb 6, 2018 - 5:30am
By your leave, Ian,
 
Fascism was originally an authoritarian movement started by Benito Mussolini in March 1919, which came to power in Italy in Oct. 1922. Later on it became the general name for similar movements started in other countries, among which German national socialism is the most prominent. By 1940 fascism could be regarded as a form of societal organization and as an attitude of mind which had its adherents in practically all countries of the earth. The original Italian name of “fascismo” is derived from the Latin “fasces,” bundles, denoting in ancient Rome a bundle of rods with an axe, borne before Roman magistrates as a symbol of authority.

The origins of the fascist movement in Italy are to be found both in the wave of disillusionment and at the same time in the exacerbated nationalism which swept Italy after 1918. Even before the war of 1914-1918, Enrico Corradini had propagated a doctrine of extreme and belligerent nationalism, which had fanned enthusiasm for the Libyan War of 1911 and for imperial expansion, and the poet Gabriele d’Anninzio had exalted in verse and prose not only the mission of a victorious Italy, but also the love of danger, adventure and war. In the military coup by which he and a legion of black-shirted followers gained possession of Fiume in Sept. 1919, and during the 16 months in which he as Duce ruled the city, d’Annunzio introduced a constitution foreshadowing the “corporative state” and all the rites, salutes, allocutions and mass shouts which later became characteristic of the fascist movement. Mussolini himself before 1914 had been a leading member and editor of the Italian Social Democratic party, but he had always represented the tendencies of revolutionary syndicalism with their emphasis on direct action and enthusiastic will. Against the attitude of his party, Mussolini supported Italy’s entrance into the war in the fall of 1914; on November 15 he founded his own newspaper, the Popolo d’Italia, in Milan, which called itself an organ of combatants and producers and carried the social revolutionary motto by Blanqui, “Who has steel has bread,” and Napoleon’s saying, “The revolution is an idea which has found bayonets.” Mussolini’s first famous editorial bore the characteristic title, “Audacity.”

In the social unrest and moral confusion which followed the war of 1914-1918, Mussolini founded the Fasci di Combattimento on March 23, 1919, in Milan. The new group had no definite program; at first Mussolini was still a revolutionary syndicalist, who propagated the expropriation of the land, the mines, and all means of transportation. It was not until the beginning of 1921 that he allied his group openly with the propertied classes, with the landowners and the industrialists. But whatever his sociological affiliations, he was moved throughout by a fierce nationalism and by the love of violence and adventure. When he ran in Milan for a parliamentary seat in the elections of Nov. 16, 1919, he got less that 5,000 votes out of 346,000. But the deep social unrest prevailing in Italy in 1920 gave Mussolini a chance, and though the danger of any bolshevist or socialist success had entirely faded by the end of the year, Mussolini and his squads of violent young men appeared to the frightened upper classes as a guarantee of security. Thus, with the army conniving, Mussolini’s followers set for themselves the task of “restoring order” and breaking up the socialist movements and organizations. With a boastful ruthlessness, with the proud sacrifice of all ethical scruples to success, the local squadristis, under the leadership of men like Grandi, Balbo, Farinacci and others, set out for the conquest of power in the name of youth against what they called “the tottering parliamentarism” of the “senile” and undecided liberals. The lack of resistance on the part of the government, the army and the police, emboldened the fascists who had formed themselves into the national fascist party in Nov. 1921.
Flying Junior Added Feb 6, 2018 - 5:35am
In the following year Mussolini completely abandoned his original socialist, anti-monarchist and anti-Catholic program. He had no definite doctrine to offer. “Our program is simple: we wish to govern Italy. They ask us for programs, but there are already too many. It is not programs that are wanting for the salvation of Italy, but men and will power.” On Oct. 28, 1922, the famous march on Rome was staged. Though the fascists and the nationalists were outnumbered in the Italian parliament by ten to one, and though with some show of resolute action the fascists could easily have been stopped, the king refused to sign the proclamation of the state of siege which his government had prepared, and on Oct. 29 invited Mussolini to form the new government. Though the new prime minister at first accepted a coalition cabinet and preserved some of the forms of the liberal state, within a very few years all the trappings of parliamentarism were gone, all other parties outlawed, all civil liberties and constitutional guarantees suppressed, and a full dictatorship established. The process was accelerated by the reaction of the country and of the civilized world to the murder of the socialist deputy Matteotti, in June 1924, on the eve of his exposure of the graft and corruption of the fascist party. Highest fascist officials were alleged to have been implicated in the murder. In his effort to save his regime from the outraged feelings of the country, which in turn was identified with its leader. Though he professed to fight bolshevism, he successfully adopted its methods, without, however, being able to carry them in the different climate of Italy as far as they were carried in Russia and later on in Germany. The different squadristi organizations had been reformed on Feb. 10, 1923, as the Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale.

Fascism in its beginnings was not a doctrine and had no clearly elaborated program. It was a technique for gaining and retaining power by violence, and with an astonishing flexibility it subordinated all questions of program to this one aim. But it was dominated from the beginning by a definite attitude of mind which exalted the fighting spirit, military discipline, ruthlessness and action, and rejected contemptuously all ethical motives as weakening the resoluteness of will. Fascism is power politics and realpolitik in their most naked form; all theoretical considerations are subservient to what is regarded as the “inexorable dynamics” of the factual situation. Ultimately everything depends upon the ever-changing will of the leader, decisions which cannot be discussed, but are blindly obeyed and immediately executed. Thus fascism could present itself in a given situation as a bulwark of the social order against social revolution, against Marxism and the proletariat, and could in a different situation become the propagandist and spearhead of a proletarian world revolution against conservatism and wealth, against bourgeoisie and capitalism.
 
Transcribed by yours truly, Flying Junior, from the 1950 Encylopaedia Britannica article on the same subject.
 
La Jolla California, July 2009
Flying Junior Added Feb 6, 2018 - 6:01am
The take away is the last paragraph.
 
Fascism in its beginnings was not a doctrine and had no clearly elaborated program... it was dominated from the beginning by a definite attitude of mind which exalted the fighting spirit, military discipline, ruthlessness and action, and rejected contemptuously all ethical motives as weakening the resoluteness of will. Fascism is power politics and realpolitik in their most naked form; all theoretical considerations are subservient to what is regarded as the “inexorable dynamics” of the factual situation. Ultimately everything depends upon the ever-changing will of the leader, decisions which cannot be discussed, but are blindly obeyed and immediately executed. Thus fascism could present itself in a given situation as a bulwark of the social order against social revolution, against Marxism and the proletariat, and could in a different situation become the propagandist and spearhead of a proletarian world revolution against conservatism and wealth, against bourgeoisie and capitalism.
wsucram15 Added Feb 6, 2018 - 12:30pm
Ian..Im not confused..women have the right to march for whatever they want..period. 
You dont need to understand it or agree. None of us care.
Frosty Wooldridge Added Feb 6, 2018 - 2:22pm
It's amazing that any woman or gay person would support anything to do with moslems. Under Islam, women possess no rights to speech, religion, dress, choice of mate, sexuality, suffer FGM, honor killings at 20,000 annually, acid in their faces and beheadings. They toss gays over building or decapitate them.  Funny how anyone in the West supports that kind of insanity from that insane religion:



Islam’s philosophy remains: conquest. Islam’s economic system means the conquerors live off the bounty of the conquered and look for new people to loot. You see it in Europe today, but Canada, America and Australia grow large in their cross-hairs.  You may forget that the Middle East remains a desert, however oil makes its leaders rich, but it’s people remain illiterate and poverty stricken. Their oil gives the illusion of functioning economies, but  foreign interests run their management of the oil fields.  Importing millions of Muslims creates welfare and conflict within a host country.



 
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 6, 2018 - 2:50pm
FJ,
As your post says, Fascism was never a political philosophy or even an ideology, it was only ever about power.
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 6, 2018 - 3:06pm
Jeanne, you are very confused because your argument comes down to "Women have the right to be commanded in what they do, what they wear and how they behave by men, their fathers, brothers, husbands and preachers.
You and others of your ilk also, and quite rightly in my view, condemn Christian  and secular men who beat or otherwise violate women. Yet you have no problem supporting Muslim men's right to beat their women (their chattels.) The minimum punishment in Sharia for a woman who disobeys  her husband is to be beaten by him.
Any woman who would march in support of these things and then claim to be a feminist is really nothing but a virtue signaller.
You should care, i.e. be careful what your virtue signalling leads you into.
As Frosty says above: " It's amazing that any woman or gay person would support anything to do with moslems. Under Islam, women possess no rights to speech, religion, dress, choice of mate, sexuality, suffer FGM, honor killings at 20,000 annually, acid in their faces and beheadings."
And you claim you support all this? Astounding!
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 6, 2018 - 3:15pm
Frosty, I've often been amazed to see GayBLT activists who are constantly screeching about their 'rights', in the next breath supporting Islam and demanding we tolerate their quirky traditions like vaginal mutilation, stonings and floggings, forced marriage and denial if any rights and liberties to women (whose status is lower than that of cattle in some Muslim societies.)
And that charming practice of throwing homosexuals off tall buildings, one might think would be enough to convince even the most addle-brained liberal that Islam is not compatible with western values.  
Thomas Napers Added Feb 7, 2018 - 1:28am
Articles about the World Hijab Day are entirely different than prominent liberals calling attention to the day.  The former is trying to sell advertising and writing on controversial matters is a sure way to attract some eyeballs.  The latter is not going to waste their political capital on such a controversial cause.  Once again, I asked you to identify a “prominent liberal feminist who felt this was a day to be celebrate” and you still haven’t done that.
 
As for your debate tactics, I find it incredibly slimy to quote so much of what I wrote but leave out the one sentence that really mattered.  Furthermore, it's your assertion that liberal feminists believe the day should be celebrated.   So the act of finding articles on the matter proves nothing and is more evidence of slimy debate tactics.   In addition, hundreds (maybe thousands) of articles are published on those websites every day.  
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 7, 2018 - 11:01am
Napers, my debate tactics slimy because I did not do what you would have liked me to? I'd like to know by what authority you think you can tell me how to reply to your comments 
I'd be interested to know which sentence in your comment that I did not refer to is the one you thought so earth shatteringly important? To be perfectly frank I though the whole thing was a nit picking whine aimed solely at undermining my post. As for your complaint about my not linking to 'prominent feminists' does it occur to you that a) who I deem a prominent feminist here in Britain and who you deem to be such in the USA might be very different and b) the comments I referred to might have been made in TV or radion news features and thus not easily linkable.
 
Here are a few more links, although you evidently did not read the last lot.
 
I Am A Hijabi Feminist Hijab is a symbol of empowerment.The Guardian
Why these women are wearing headscarves on World Hijab Day in Phoenix
British Government Promotes ‘Liberation’ of Hijab at London Event
And here from The Washington Standard is a reminder of the oppression of women, and the cruel punishments handed out in the Muslim world to women who dare to resist that oppression.
 
from The Washinton Standard
Look, no cares if you wear the hijab. No one cares if you wear purple hair, for that matter. But what about the women forced to wear the hijab. American girls like target="_blank" rel="noopener external">Jessica MokdadAmina Said, Sarah SaidNoor Almaleki, and so many others who were honor murdered for not wearing the hijab, for wanting to live free. Who speaks for them? The real world recognition day should be in tribute to women who are forced to wear the hijab, beaten and/or arrested if they don’t.
One campaign fighting against the enforced hijab in Iran set up by Ms. Masih Alinejad is target="_blank" rel="noopener external">My Stealthy Freedom. It is “dedicated to Iranian women inside the country who want to share their ‘stealthily’ taken photos without the veil,” and aims to be a “living archive” of their fight.
 
As wsucram15 says, women (those lucky enough to live in the democratic world at least) have the right to protest in favour of whatever they dislike. With her usual lack of logic however Jeanne forgets that men have the same right, and that women and men have the right to oppose and criticize silly, virtue signalling protests. It's all about free speech and equal rights. Now if you have any argument to advance in support of the case that World Hijab Day is a great stride forward for womens' rights please feel free. But if you only have more snivelling whines to offer, don't bother. So far you have contributed nothing to the thread, I'm happy to keep it that way.
Dave Volek Added Feb 7, 2018 - 11:48am
It is always amazing the directions a WB article can take. In this case, it became very acrimonious.
 
I thought Ian had put together a well constructed position. Because I never heard of this "hijab day",  I kind of thought could be a made up story. Today, I checked some of his links and the story seems legit. 
 
Whether Ian is an islamophobe or not is irrelevant. Ian makes a point that that should the feminist thinkers in the west honor the hijab when it is used as a tool oppression in a significant part of the Muslim world.
 
This is where the discussion should have gone, in my opinion. I can see both sides of the issue, and it would have been nice to have someone who fully supports this western hijab day to explain themselves. But no, the discussion went into Ian's character.
 
Come on WB contributors, we can do better than that!
 
 
 
Ian Thorpe Added Feb 7, 2018 - 1:15pm
Thanks Dave, I've never been keen on sites that make a big thing of comment threads for the reasons you raise. There are two types of comment that particularly irritate me, those that demand I citeo  a source for a particular statement, and those that start to pick apart my articles as if the responder is a teacher grading my homework assignment.
When I write something I am the source, whether people agree or disagree is up to them but I feel it is their responsibility to provide links to sources that prove me wrong. As for the homework graders, well it's more years than I care to remember since I left school and I'm simply not interested in people telling me (or anyone else) what we should have written or how we should have written it.
I have no objection at all to Muslim women wearing the hijab and think it is unacceptable that some people in Europe feel the need to insult Muslims wearing this garment. On the other hand there have been many instances of Christians and Jews being attacked for wearing a decorative cross or Star of David.
Dave Volek Added Feb 7, 2018 - 1:30pm
Ian
 
There are all sorts of paradoxes on this hijab issue.
 
In these days of "alternative facts", I think it is a rather futile task to research appropriate websites to support one's opinions and perspectives. If the links help prove the point, they will be disregarded as fake news or fake research. So why bother? Especially when the readership here is not that great.
 
Rather I try to use logic in making my case, either with an article or comment to an article. One of my favorites is Thomas Sutrina who is still blaming the American welfare state (if America is truly such a state) on FDR. He has all sorts of websites to prove his point. When I point out that Republicans have all sorts of opportunities in the past 70 years to dismantle this welfare state, they have not done this. His counter logic is to continue to blame FDR, but add a few more current D's to his list of people committing political atrocities.
 
Too bad this discussion did not go in the direction its should have gone. Maybe Autumn needs to find moderate Muslim scholar to participate on WB.
 
 
 
 
Tamara Wilhite Added Feb 14, 2018 - 6:36pm
Thank you for discussing this subject. It isn't getting enough attention except fawningly.

Recent Articles by Writers Ian Thorpe follows.