Reddit comments from January 2025

Can you post the entire thread for us non-X users?

Would like this

Are you using neural networks, LLM, or another kind of AI?

What is the evidence that the Quranic author knew of the Syriac legend or of Alexander being referenced as "Dhul Qarnayn" in pre-Islamic or early Islamic Arabia?

It seems like this is conflating the plausibility of the Quranic figure being Alexander with actual causal evidence. Even if the legend predates the Quran we would have to demonstrate that the Arabian millieu was not only familiar with the story but also familiar with this Biblical phraseology you mentioned (while also arguing that the pagan Arabs had a low resolution understanding of Biblical stories).

Quranic would have to be able to draw a direct link between the Syriac legend/Two Horned terminology and the Quranic author.

Again this is evidence based on plausibility not empiricism or causality. There could be a much less plausible explanation that is actually true. It's fine to have it as a working theory and for it to convince people but where I struggle is when there are claims of evidence or clear cut proof. Historians often conflate plausibility or the coherence of a narrative with likeliness an account or perspective on events is true. There's almost no correlation between the two.

It's worth noting that the two additional Suwar have still been a part of Muslim practice and tradition in Hadith literature. Both of them are considered authentic extra-Quranic sunnah "supplications" that were taught "like the Quran" and recited in prayer. That goes back at least to the compilation of the hadith corpus.

Can you help me find any information on when writing vernacular Arabic became more common? Was it some time in the 20th century? I'm well aware to this day al-fus'ha al-haditha is standard but it's not uncommon to read novels or even magazines that stray much more into a particular country's vernacular (let alone social media).

The only thing I've read that remotely discusses this is Freedom in the Arab World by Wael Abu Uksa but he's primarily focused on the development of very specific liberal shibboleths brought in by colonialism in the MENA.

The modernist Salafi Mohammed Abduh was heavily critical of the hadith corpus but not from a historical perspective per se. He saw hadith that contradicted rationality (his definition of it) as being more likely to be fabricated. His student Rashid Rida veered the modernist Salafi movement back towards traditional Sunni hadith scholarship.

I think the reasons why Muslim scholars accepted the broader theories around Sunnah and Hadith have less to do with those specific studies or the books and more with broader questions of how they saw the construction of knowledge. It seems to me impossible to natively come up with something like ICMA from the perspective of Islamic studies. The assumptions underpinning ICMA or Western hadith scholarship more broadly are diametrically opposed to the assumptions underpinning traditional hadith studies.

Secular academia presupposes that objective truth can be known from the senses observing the material world while hadith studies presupposes that truth can only be known by first tethering knowledge to some objective anchor outside the…

My argument was developing HCM or ICMA natively within the Islamic tradition was something that could not happen. It was not that Muslim scholars couldn't learn HCM or ICMA and then apply it to anything. It's conceivable a Muslim scholar could go through a secular Islamic studies program and change their entire methodology. They could also go through a secular Biblical studies program and do the same.

But would the methods and approaches from these fields natively come from Islamic thought? No.

Is there even a way to reconcile aspects of both? I'm sure Jonathan Brown or Ramon Harvey or Yasir Qadhi have a lot to say about that.

Please refer to my other comments

Historical critical method. Isnad cum matn analysis.

It also seems to me he was doing more direct matn criticism and comparing the mutun to the Quran. Unfortunately I don't see any work on this in English. I am trying to locate works specifically on his approach to hadith criticism in Arabic as this could be an important missing link to this conversation.

Some sources I'm digging through:

https://archives.ju.edu.jo/index.php/law/article/download/495/6357/997

https://waqfeya.net/books/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%86%D9%87%D8%AC-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB%D9%8A-%D8%B9%D9%86%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%AD%D8%B2%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%86%D8%AF%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A-774a3c2fa4fa4f8884ae0126a95e2139

I have a hard time finding books written by Sultan al-Umayri written a few years ago let alone some obscure thesis about how ibn Hazm graded hadith in al-Muhalla 💀 Islamic bookshop owners can be surprisingly unhelpful and under informed

The text looked fine for me when I downloaded it. Thanks for more resources. I'll try to dig into this in my free time. Will tag u/chonkshonk in case he finds this interesting

It seems that the Quran makes a pretty big deal and focuses a lot on dismantling this kind of henotheism. As is clear from the passages quoted here and by reading the Quran, the idea of Islamic monotheism is a lot stricter than Qurayshi henotheism.

Yes. Jonathan Brown discusses this in "Misquoting Muhammad." The Asharis saw morality as being totally subjective and determined by God. Mutazilah saw things as objectively good or bad and determinable in broad strokes by the intellect, refined and given detail by the Shari'ah.

I wrote a paper called, "THE HIGHER INTENTS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE SACRED LAW: ABŪ ISḤĀQ IBRĀHĪM IBN MŪSĀ AL-SHĀṬIBĪ’S MORAL EPISTEMOLOGY AND TELEOGY" in university. Long story short, imam al-Shatibi tries to describe things as being morally good or bad because they are inherently good/bad from a human perspective (harms/benefits) but also being objectively good/bad from a Divine perspective. So, he argues for both aspects of the dilemma simultaneously and tries to create a unified moral theory.

Thanks for paying attention? 😅

I have a masters in IT management, this was for a religious studies course. I also studied Islam formally in a traditional environment. At some point I'd like to get a regular degree in Islamic studies.

TL;DR - The scholars you mention are approaching & experiencing the Quran in a fashion Muslims wouldn't advise. Take ten minutes to listen to this to get a better idea: https://youtu.be/P-H6XZvf7mM?feature=share I'd also recommend watching…

Ancient Chinese historians seemed to have a very strong grasp of chronology and narrative structure. The Quran isn't nonlinear because Easterns don't understand time in the same way. It's clearly intentionally nonlinear.

Do you think people who listen to opera feel that way?

It's a pretty close analogy. Obviously beauty and song are subjective, but it isn't about you individually enjoying it. It's about you being able to appreciate that to some people, listening to it is a very moving and powerful experience.

My entire comment is trying to bridge the gap between how lay and scholar Muslims see the Quran versus the difficulty some Western academics have even deciphering the text. Obviously the comment is Islamo-centric, the entire point is to articulate the gap in the perceptions.

The Quran is not the same as Genesis or the Constitution or Herodotus. However, Muslim civilization uses the Quran in a similar way to which Western civilization uses those varied texts. Obviously it's not exactly analogous, but I am emphasizing the cultural impact of the text.

The question was: why do some Western academics and analysts find the Quran difficult to get through? My answer was: Muslims would advise them on a different approach.

Edit: I'm also surprised that you claimed there are epic poems in the Bible. What are you referring to? In my reading of the Torah and New Testament I don't see a single epic poem. The Bible has definitely inspired several epic poems, like Dante's Divine Comedy or Milton's Paradise lost, but I'm unaware of any book in the Bible whose genre is "epic poem."

The Quran is not poetry but it claims it's own unique genre and there are definitely aspects of epic poetry, especially in Surah 12.

The idea that the Quran isn't hugely influential on Islamic jurisprudence is definitely inaccurate even if the hadith comprise the mass of legal discussion. There's no doubt that there is much more of a direct relationship between modern legal thinking in Muslim countries and the Quran than there is in modern Judeo-Christian countries and the Bible. I would say Judaic law is as influenced by the Torah as Islamic law is by the Quran, but I don't know the last time Judaic law was significantly operant at a legal level. I also don't know much about Jesuit legal studies, but I'd venture to say the Bible hasn't been a significant direct influence on any major legal system for the last several hundred years.

Saudi Arabia until today has to try to justify changes to the legal system using the Quran to the extent that Mohammad bin Salman takes interviews where he attempts to quote the Quran at length to justify reforms.

As an aside, there should be no discussion as to the Bible's place in world literature. It is one of the most important and profound texts ever compiled. It is definitely the cornerstone of the Western canon and perhaps the single most important foundational text of the entire civilization.

The same is true of the Quran for the Islamic world, although the two texts are very different.

"The first thing that Western readers are apt to notice about the Qur’an is that it displays neither a linear narrative organisation of the sort familiar from the book of Genesis or the New Testament gospels, nor a topical arrangement like…

It seems like you can't distinguish between making an argument for something and making an argument that a group of people believe something. You have conflated that I am arguing that the Qur'an holds various roles in the minds of a…

\>This plays into something confusing I've noticed about your comments. I might say something like, the Qur'an is rhymed prose, and your response would be, Muslims don't believe that the Qur'an is rhymed prose. Do you think that the…

\>Why does it seem that way. I just said that a text we both agree is not poetry, is not epic poetry. \>You also have not answered my question concerning the focus here on epic poetry in your comparisons between the Bible and the Qur'an.…

A decent amount of corporal or capital punishments are described in the Quran. So are the fundamental rules of Qisas and Diya. The Quran describes the fundamentals of Islamic contract law, the prohibition on usury, and is the primary…

I think ibn Hazm may have already created a proto-ICMA but I haven't had the time to complete researching this. It's interesting because he was the one of the most literalist/analytic thinkers in Islamic history which dovetails nicely into the analytic bend of the Western academy.

I think these methodologies can affect some scholars but others will not shift.

Reposting an old comment: All Islamic sects came from controversies. They are signified by their positions on issues of dispute. There's two major sources of these issues: pre-existing theological/philosophical issues or internal Islamic…

Not sure if this is a troll or if you need mental health assistance but regardless not the right sub

Which book?

History of the Qur'an: Approaches and Explorations edited by F. Redhwan Karim?

Seems to be History of the Qur'an: Approaches and Explorations edited by F. Redhwan Karim

https://www.kubepublishing.com/blogs/news/an-alternative-opinion-on-the-reality-of-the-seven-a%E1%B8%A5ruf-and-its-relationship-with-the-qira%CA%BEat-dr-yasir-qadhi?srsltid=AfmBOor8XjloPFbHq-RwjczgU4S0AxqPgYA_iVMs-Ig8GE0ioAUQjS8z

I'm surprised this is so under the radar considering the controversy around his statements a few years ago. YQ studied Qira'at from a traditional perspective under the same teacher I did so it will be interesting to read his takeaways, although I think I have a pretty good idea already.

This isn't a direct analogy. The legal opinions of the scholars are very well documented across the centuries. The problem is that most of these opinions are based on either interpretations of the Quran or Hadith. Hadith form a key component in Islamic epistemology because of the claim they come directly from the Prophet. If a hadith is demonstrated not to come from the Prophet, Muslim jurists immediately reduce it's legal value exponentially.

There are athar that are legal opinions from the prophetic companions and some scholars don't utilize these at all, even though they would be the earliest and greatest jurists having learned the law from the prophet himself.

Sunnis who are on the Shafi'i paradigm (which is essentially everyone for the last thousand years including Hanafis) take the concept of "Sunnah" as a co-equal Revelatory source to the Quran.

What you are describing is more analogous to the body of fiqh writings which are multiple thousands of times more voluminous than the entire hadith corpus.

Farid is not equipped to adequately deal with this and his response did not adequately deal with it. I do believe there is a predecessor to Little's work in ibn Hazm al-Dhahiri and there is a lot to be said about ICMA but it will take time for this conversation to advance.

Jonathan Brown has a more robust response

The issue here is that these narrations are usually utilized in an antagonistic way. What you are describing is analogous to Amal Ahl al-Madina, the practice of the people of Madina, who some scholars asserted went back to the Prophet. However, when you have one hadith where the Prophet said a woman has to wait X period of time after divorce to get remarried and the other one says X, jurists can't just chalk it up to oral tradition.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/s/EDjG5RJONk

https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/s/EDjG5RJONk

Take a look at imam Nawawi's 40 hadith. They won't take you more than 20 minutes to read through. Then just skim through the chapters in Muwatta Malik. That should kind of help you to understand what hadith is trying to accomplish.

It really is supposed to be an accurate more or less verbatim account of what Muhammad taught.

This argument never really made sense to me. The traditional narrative is that these people were either savants capable of memorizing thousands of pages verbatim or that they were raised in a culture where they had rāwīs who would accompany poets and commit their poetry to memory. They also attempt to use multiple asanīd from various sahabah that don't overlap to support narrations.

In fact there are currently living hadith scholars with this kind of savant capability, who have memorized the six sunnan verbatim at a young age with relative ease. We see these across every culture obviously.

The traditional narrative goes to some lengths to explain why it wasn't a game of telephone where it was easy to garble things.

There are better criticisms than this one.

Thanks, had never heard of Avot. I have a really pitiful understanding of traditional Judaism so it's great to have resources.

The Sunnah is supposed to be, specifically, Muhammad's direct commentary on the Qur'an which is inspired by God. The Quran is God's verbatim words, the Sunnah is the verbatim words of Muhammad inspired by God. If a particular sunnah is believed not to be from Muhammad directly then it is no longer sunnah and ends up having far less importance.

The idea that the Qira'at themselves go back to Muhammad isn't even asserted by traditional scholars of Qira'at. There are some modern non-specialists (traditional scholars of another field but not Qira'at) that make this claim, but from very early on it is clear that the Qira'at are partially a product of ijtihad (individual scholarly research). Both ibn Mujahid and Jazari comment on this (ibn Mujahid within the very first sentence of Kitab al-Sab').

What some scholars tried to argue is that all of the variations found within the Qira'at find an origin in Muhammad reciting them that way. That's more reasonable but still very hard to imagine.

That the Prophet recited in 7 Ahruf and that those Ahruf were canonized as 7 and then 10 Qira'at is more of a popular misconception among religious laity than anything else.

Just to quote ibn Mujahid directly,

اخْتلف النَّاس فِي الْقِرَاءَة كَمَا اخْتلفُوا فِي الْأَحْكَام وَرويت الْآثَار بالاختلاف عَن الصَّحَابَة وَالتَّابِعِينَ توسعة وَرَحْمَة للْمُسلمين

"The people differed regarding qira'at the same way they did in ahkam (rulings). The narrations were reported with differences from the companions and the followers out of dispensation and a mercy to the Muslims."

That's the first sentence of Kitab al-Sab'.

The dominant opinion until ibn al-Jazari was not that all the variations came from the Prophet but rather that the Prophet allowed variations - even more than are compiled in the Uthmanic rasm. Then Uthman compiled the Quran according to…

I would also say the tawattur argument is a lay misconception probably spread by misinformed apologists. Most traditional Qira'at scholars follow ibn al-Jazari's conditions as set forth by dr. Marijn here.

Good bot

Yes but if you want to deconstruct that narrative I personally believe there are stronger criticisms which have yet to be addressed.

I came back to answer but saw other people more knowledgable than me had already commented.

What I can say is this:

People definitely ascribed specific readings of particular Ayat to the Prophet but no one ever ascribed an entire Qira'ah from start to finish to him. That being said, certain scholars definitely saw some readings as being "Sunnah" more broadly (such as Malik and Ahmad).

As for the historical assertion I made which Dr. Marijn substantiated, I do not know of any academic text which discusses this. I personally know it due to my engagement with these first-hand sources from the early to medieval to premodern to modern texts on the issue. I believe that's how Dr. Marijn is aware of it as well.

It would probably be a great thing to research and study. At some point I would love to do a deep-dive on the historical development of theology about the Qur'an, including the changing views on Qira'at. However it would be a monumental task and probably a PhD thesis.

Love

What stood out to me:

Zero-proof mock tails

BERBERE popcorn 1340 Cal 13.95
Tossed with clarified butter seasoned with ginger, garlic & berbere spice

DILL PICKLE popcorn 1470 Cal 11.95
Tossed with dill pickle seasonings & clarified butter

BANANA PUDDING JAR 870 Cal 9.95
Banana pudding, banana, Nilla wafers,
whipped cream

KEY LIME PIE JAR 810 Cal 9.95
Zesty key lime custard, graham cracker
crust, whipped cream

TONY’S CHOCOLONELY™ LIL’ BITS 520 Cal 7.95
Milk chocolate caramel sea salt and cookie mix

HAND-SPUN MILKSHAKES 8.95
Vanilla (730 Cal), Chocolate (770 Cal), Strawberry (840 Cal),
Cookie (870 Cal), or Cold Brew Coffee

ACAI CHIA SMOOTHIE 360 Cal 13.95
Acai, chia, Greek yogurt, orange,
raspberry & blueberry

VEGAN BBQ BURGER 820 Cal 16.95
Beyond MEAT™ patty, bbq sauce, kale & carrot slaw,
dill pickles, toasted ciabatta

GREENS & GOAT CHEESE pizza 890 Cal 15.95
Spinach-herb ranch sauce, charred broccoli, goat cheese,
baby spinach, mozzarella & parmesa

Imagine thinking that Muslim fundamentalists will get rid of sahabiyyat mentioned in authentic narrations as "fictional" characters. This is laughable.

Or maybe some random article about the curriculum a government that was established less than 3 weeks ago doesn't have all of the facts? Most teachers internationally and in Syria are women. Also, this isn't some hardline government. They just appointed a female finance minister. You guys are just anti-Islam (which is the same thing as being anti-Arab since the vast vast majority of actual Arabs are religious Muslims).

It's going to be the Odyssey condensed down into the most big-picture-ready scenes with huge liberties and ready for mass consumption. We saw what Nolan did with Oppenheimer. It will probably be a good movie but that will be it's primary objective: to be a good movie inspired by the Odyssey. Accuracy, depth, sophistication, those are all secondary or tertiary concerns. It will be entertainment first, art second.

But it will bring the Odyssey into public consciousness in a way it hasn't been... perhaps ever?

This is called phenomenology in philosophy.

This sounds like someone who doesn't know about software engineering role-playing what a "cool tech CEO" would say. "Send us your code" 🤣

You sound like you just read Black Swan and made Taleb into your entire personality

This is insane

At a certain point the vast majority of Ottoman civil servants and government employees were Albanians or Balkans/ Eastern European. This was because the Ottomans had a "devshirme" or golden cage system. They would enslave non-Muslims eastern Europeans in war, then raise the ones who accepted Islam on the government's dime. These European Muslims in various provinces of the Ottoman empire were technically slaves, but they got the best education money could provide.

They became the soldiers, generals, politicians, judges, and sometimes even sultans of the Ottoman empire.

After a particular period of service or after having free children, they would be discharged from mandatory service.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme

At a certain point the vast majority of Ottoman civil servants and government employees were Albanians or Balkans/ Eastern European. This was because the Ottomans had a "devshirme" or golden cage system. They would enslave non-Muslims eastern Europeans in war, then raise the ones who accepted Islam on the government's dime. These European Muslims in various provinces of the Ottoman empire were technically slaves, but they got the best education money could provide.

They became the soldiers, generals, politicians, judges, and sometimes even sultans of the Ottoman empire.

After a particular period of service or after having free children, they would be discharged from mandatory service.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme

I'm not arguing it was benevolent. I'm just describing what happened. Native Americans technically weren't slaves under residential schooling. However they also never recovered from the horrors of the accompanying genocide.

I don't know exactly how damaging this practice was to the Albanian and Balkan slaves. What I do know is that the ones that ended up in civil service and eventually free had a relatively high status in society. However, they were enslaved and forcibly taken from their homeland.

The fact that Trump has had to pardon so many people shows how broken the Justice system is. It's time to change it.

Right now he's just letting his friends out. Change has to be systematic and include poor people

Killed it

I don't think I have tbh

Kojima is so wild for this. We never got Solid Snake again until 4 and he's aged a century in a few years

What's crazy is the director's movie Un Prophete is a masterpiece but I literally couldn't watch 10 mins of this abomination

The things you're describing are more often a product of repressed sexuality. Unless you're talking about a sex addict, a zani who has had only a few partners is probably more well adjusted than a 30 year old virgin. One of the consequences of late marriage is sexual repression and that often leads to deviancy or hypersexuality.

We need to have these conversations as a community.

Someone was flipping out on me so I didn't even get to reply lol.

1. I'm not defending zina or zanis. It's haram.
2. I am discussing the possibility that a virgin can and may be more likely to have these same problems.
3. We have to stop acting like celibacy doesn't damage people who need intimacy. The solution isn't to get your needs through haram, it's to fast and then get them through halal.
4. However, celibacy affects people differently. Especially across the gender divide. Men are liable to become traumatized from repression and this can manifest in severely deviant behaviors. We saw this in Saudi for about 40 years with a huge uptick in homosexuality due to overly strict rules on ikhtilat (gender mixing) and late marriage.

We need to let people get married early and destigmatize divorce. Most Muslims 15-35 in the West are developmentally behind in terms of marriage and/or sexually repressed. It's a disaster.

What happens when a chaste man or a chaste women displays some or even all of these behaviors?

The likelihood of finding outliers in every respect goes down statistically.

The easiest kind of husband to find is: young, broke, immoral, disloyal.

Once you get an outlier in any respect it gets rarer.

Women begin to outnumber men around 35 years old, so there are less men at that age.

The amount of men making excess of $200k is less than 10% of the population.

The amount of religious Muslim men in the West is probably 10-20% of the overall population. In the US all Muslims are less than 1%, so we are talking 0.2% of the population.

Men who want only one wife are even less than that.

Then the men a particular woman finds attractive is usually 5-10% of the population. Add in height and ethnicity requirements.

Eventually you get a formula that looks like 30% * 10% * 0.2% * 5% * 1% = 0.000006%

So the sister that makes these requirements and not "nice to haves" has to ask herself if she is in not the top 1% of women but the top 0.00006%.

Usually these women just wait it out until late 20s and compromise with a man in the top 20% of some things and normal in others.

It's not, I agree. The problem isn't with sisters finding virgin men. There's a ton of them. The problem is that sisters are often not attracted to these brothers because the price they paid for obeying Allah is being developmentally behind, socially awkward, no "rizz" or "game", and very quickly icky. What sisters are upset about is meeting men they are attracted to and finding out they aren't virgins or those men lying to them.

There is a supreme overabundance of virgin Muslim men and there are more of them than women.

This is almost a non-issue. I don't get what the concern is. It's extremely easy to find practicing virgin brothers ready to get married. You can go to any masjid and find at least 5. What's the problem? No one disagrees chaste men are for chaste women.

OP's post suggested chaste men will be sexually normative and that these men are hard to find. Both things are untrue.

You're looking for the wrong men in the wrong places. This is the exact reason I made these comments. If what you want is a religious virgin man you can easily find them. The problem is this: sisters tend to find these brothers unattractive and auto-disqualify them. These brothers are not socially well adjusted. They are repressed and don't know how to act around women.

If you want to find a religious virgin brother go to your local masjid, speak to the imam, and ask for 25 year old or younger brothers that regularly attend the masjid. Let him know you specifically want someone who has never had a relationship before.

Then tell me if you find them appealing 🤷‍♂️

That's not what I said and I'm really concerned a lot of you sisters are lacking basic critical thinking and reading skills. I said that as you continue to compile statistically rare features in a potential partner as a condition, the likelihood you will find such a mate goes down.

If a man says he will only marry a:

Blonde * blue eyed * Arab * niqabi * hafizha * under 25 years old * homeschooled * graduate degree * virgin

The statistical likelihood of that is pretty low. It's not controversial to say that.

When women say they want a:

Tall * handsome * same ethnicity * graduate degree * minimum 100k a year income * virgin * under 30 years old * religious * not extreme * polite, etc.

We should be able to collectively muster half a braincell to realize that the likelihood of all sisters marrying someone like this is statistically improbable

Where did Allah, His Messenger, or the sahabah discuss these issues?

So you know these topics are bidd'ah yet are engaging in a bidd'ah discussion because...?

This verse is telling you what should happen not what is guaranteed to happen.

Are we still in denial as to how absolutely insane the democrats look? The US vetoed a ceasefire resolution four times at the UN but days after Trump comes into office the genocide stops. Days before the Trump admin is inaugurated Red 40 is finally banned. Tiktok was banned under Biden and now Trump wants to give them an extension.

Every possible bad move or appearance of a bad move that could be taken was taken by the Biden admin. As absolutely horrible and bonkers as Trump is they have truly made him look like a saint in comparison.

Of course Trump is closely allied with Israel the difference is that Trump refuses to display the image of cowing to Netanyahu and is willing to get easy wins like this - which translates to a temporary stop in the war. The Palestinians need this. Trump hasn't solved the war, but he did what Biden claimed was impossible for almost 2 years. If a single Palestinian life is saved that's a huge deal.

You realize that a ceasefire has definitely been enacted right? And that Trump is coming into office on Monday? These are just facts. Joe Biden's legacy is genocide.

I don't know anyone who sincerely thought Trump was an ally to Palestinians or against genocide. I think Taleb initially said there's a non-zero chance he would be better than Biden, which is true. There isn't a big difference, both are pro-genocide, but at least Trump got a ceasefire if only for a PR win and his own ego. The issue is wider US policy towards Israel.

Yet people are still being arrested and convicted of this every week 🤔💭

Because people not of the right ethnic persuasion are not granted bail on way less serious charges, accusations, and evidence?

Virginia once gave a guy a life sentence over a paintball "plot" only to overturn it after 15 years.

Maybe there's something wrong with the way bail is done across the board because it's extremely arbitrary and it should be objective? You're suggesting a solution, I just pointed out the problem.

There are way fairer justice systems that handle this much better in historical empires and in other countries around the world today

The most amazing doner with yogurt. Thank you for mentioning it.

This is totally incorrect and Stewart Rhodes of the Oath Keepers was convicted under the terrorism statute before being pardoned by Trump

It seems that there's no established mechanism to designate domestic groups as terrorists but rather to charge individual members as terrorists depending on the actions they do. There's been attempts to designate Antifa as terrorist and many domestic groups have been charged with material support. But you're right, I can't find an instance of a federal designation of a domestic group as one.

Melania and Elon both illegally overstayed Visas

I provided a definitional explanation of reasoning that is predicated on qualia. I do not have to provide that vectors can induce subjective experience, the burden of that proof rests on you

The most absolutely delusional take

It was always a concentration camp. This is the problem. When it was a Muslim concentration camp Americans turned a blind eye. Now it's going to be an immigrant concentration camp and the next step is liberal concentration camp.

This wasn't my experience at all. Every "relationship" I was in was me doing a massive amount of emotional labor to turn someone into a functional person and them harming me in the process. I think there's a big generational shift here with gen Z/alpha having a switch in terms of emotional labor investment.

It's not a good shift. I basically invested hundreds of hours of emotional labor into people who didn't appreciate it and were harming me simultaneously. It's just that the roles are reversed but it's the same problem of dysfunction.

This is called iatrogenics

Mark seemed confused about phones

Isn't it so interesting that Helena's dad says that The Grandfather will be proud?

Faradqala is my personal fav

Countries ask for US to fix the messes it makes, not for help due to problems they've caused themselves.

https://muslimmatters.org/2020/02/03/no-nuptial-agreements-maybe-next-time-dont-get-married/

Genocide is particularly when you attempt to destroy an ethnic group. What happened in WW2 is called urbicide. The intent was never to eliminate all Germans or all Japanese. The intent was to firebomb Dresden and Tokyo, to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To decimate a clustered urban population. Genocide and urbicide can overlap, but the means are slightly different. Yes, Israel developed the Dahieh doctrine from WW2 area bombing.

In such a case it can be both, but it's typically rare for an ethnic group to exist solely in an urban area. A scenario like this would usually be in the later stages of a genocide where an ethnic group has been totally cloistered into a small area so that they can be more efficiently killed, but not necessarily a concentration camp since it is technically open air.

Yes (although there is no such ethnicity of Byzantine). What's required for genocide isn't neccesarily mens rea "I am committing genocide" it is the intent to massacre civilians at scale. If the allies wanted to go after industry and tools of research, precision bombing was available, had been used before, and is now known to be more effective. The choice to commit urbicide and consequently inadvertently wipe out an ethnic group doesn't mean it isn't genocide, it just means that they intended to do something slightly less horrible but ended up accomplishing a worse goal.

There really is no justification to target civilians en masse as part of a total war philosophy. It doesn't achieve military objectives faster. It's just easier and quicker to be less discriminatory from the air. Ground-to-ground urban warfare has different considerations because it is notoriously difficult to determine who is a civilian or not despite best efforts, but from the air it's entirely a different story.

No, because there was never intent, attempt, or likelihood based on their strategy of wiping out the Germans as a whole. The allies did not want to, did not try to, and based on their strategies could not have accidentally killed all the Germans.

On the contrary, the Nazis intended and attempted to wipe out all Jews on earth.

Or, for example, the Israelis intend, attempt, and are likely to wipe out the vast majority of Palestinians.

Byzantium was an ancient empire that spanned thousands of years with hundreds of ethnicities therein, I don't think anyone ever claimed there was a cluster of genetics, values, religion, culture, and geographic location that made a group "Byzantine." There were Arabs in the Byzantine empire. There were Africans. There were Europeans. It was a cross-ethnic empire.

Palestine itself is an arbitrarily created area due to European colonialism in the middle East, but the wider Levant is an ethnic group. That being said, modern nation states that are mostly homogenous and are isolated for several generations due to their borders can eventually be considered their own ethnicity or at least their own national identity.

Simply because there was no intent, attempt, or likelihood of German extinction.

Many members of the Israeli Knesset have clearly stated an intent to eliminate all Palestinians. US officials never said this, this was not their military policy, I know of no such widespread sentiment.

Israeli military commanders have stated they are attempting to totally destroy Gaza and evict all of the Palestinians. I know of no such attempt by the allied forces to eliminate all Germans.

There is a possibility and likelihood if the war doesn't stop that nearly all Palestinians will be killed or expelled from their land. There was no such likelihood of this happening to Germany.

That's what distinguishes urbicide from genocide. All of those things were true of Dresden specifically or of Hiroshima. They did intend to wipe those cities off the map possibly killing the vast majority of inhabitants. They did attempt to do so. There was actually a success in doing so. However, they only perpetrater this against localized urban centers - not the entirety of the population.

Had the allied forces expanded their tactics outside of specific urban centers and said, "We want to apply area bombing across the entirety of Germany" and there was some likelihood of them eliminating Germans as an ethnic group/nation state (like a 90% reduction) - that would have been genocide.

Urbicide is a small scale genocide in one city.

One of them is an intended genocide. The other is an attempted genocide. The third is a likely genocide. An intended, attempted, likely genocide is a genocide in progress. It might succeed or fail at that point.

Genocide doesn't require eliminating every member of a group internationally so long as the vast majority are eliminated.

I don't know the specifics but yes it's certainly possible. This is how you'd probably determine the ethnic ancestors of modern Greeks.

It's irrelevant for intent or attempt. A person can intend to commit genocide from their basement or attempt to do so by killing one person. They're obviously a lunatic because there's no likelihood of success. As likelihood of success increases, so does the threat of it becoming a fully fledged intended, attempted, likely genocide in progress.

I think you reversed what I said

Take a look at how Netanyahu justifies the genocide of Gaza using the urbicide of the allies during WW2:

https://www.reddit.com/r/UnitedNations/s/lvCgoSUdGF

Imagine having a consistent ethical worldview where you can criticize massacres against civilians no matter who does it - not just when it's your geopolitical rival. 🤔

Americans failed to get Guantanamo shut down when it was random Muslims being picked up on made up charges and sometimes American citizens, so now Trump is just going to fill Gitmo with his opponents. Oppression is like a cancer, if it isn't stopped it spreads.