Negative Human Rights for a Positive Human Future
Most people today are A(mono)theists, i.e. not "believing" in an impossible "one god"*. Such a "collective god" would mean equally many personal "gods" as there are believers/interpretors. "Monotheisms" are for racist/sexist movements - not for individuals. Human Rights are for individuals living among individuals with same rights.
Religion always means a total or partial reduction of some people's (e.g. women''s) Human Rights equality.
Being against A(mono)theism must be categorized as contempt of basic Human Rights equality because "monotheists" have doctrines which can't comply with basic Human Rights equality.
Klevius moral formula is a bedrock you can't beat:
1 There's no absolute and fixed moral in a dynamic society.
2 Therefor we have to repeatedly agree on a minimum moral and equality for all.
3 In doing so we are logically forced to approve of negative Human Rights, i.e. not to impose restrictions other than necessary in a democracy based on as much freedom as possible for all individuals - no matter of sex, race etc. And, for the truly dumb ones, do note that this definition excludes the freedom to restrict freedom.
* Though some people keep calling their own racist/sexist "interpretation" as "god's/allah's will").
Klevius "islamophobia" CV
Some basic facts to consider about Klevius* (except that he is both "extremely normal" and extremely intelligent - which fact, of course, would not put you off if you're really interested in these questions):
* Mentored by G. H. von Wright, Wittgenstein's successor at Cambridge.
1 Klevius' analysis of consciousness is the only one that fits what we know - after having eliminated our "pride" bias of being humans (which non-human would we impress, anyway?). Its starting point is described and exemplified in a commentary to Jurgen Habermas in Klevius book Demand for Resources (1992:30-33, ISBN 9173288411, based on an article by Klevius from 1981), and is further explained in a commentary to Francis Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis under the title The Even More Astonishing Hypothesis (EMAH), which can be found in Stalk's archive and which has been on line since 2003 for anyone to access/assess.
2 Klevius out of island/mainland fluctuating Southeast Asia Denisovans up to big skulled Siberians as the birth of much more intelligent modern humans who then spread all over the world, is the only analysis that fits both genetic reality as well as tool and art sophistication seen in e.g. the Denisova cave (no dude, Blombos etc. don’t come even close).
3 Klevius criticism of Human Rights violating sharia islamofascism (e.g. OIC) which is called "islamophobia" by islamofascists and their supporters who don't care about the most basic of Human Rights (e.g. re. women). Klevius' "islamophobia" has two roots: 1) UN's 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration, which, contrary to any form of muslim sharia, doesn't, for example, allow sex to be an excuse for robbing females of their full Human Rights equality, and 2) the history of the origin of islam ( e.g. Hugh Kennedy, Robert G. Hoyland, K. S. Lal etc.) which reveals a murderous, pillaging, robbing, enslaving and raping racist/sexist supremacist ideology that exactly follows precisely those basic islamic tenets which are now called "unislamic" but still survive today (as sharia approved sex slavery, sharia approved "liberation” jihad, academic jihad etc.) behind the sharia cover which is made even more impenetrable via the spread of islamic finance, mainly steered from the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.
4 Klevius analysis of sex segregation/apartheid (now deceptively called “gender segregation”) and heterosexual attraction - see e.g. Demand for Resources (1981/1992), Daughters of the Social State (1993), Angels of Antichrist (1996), Pathological Symbiosis (2003), or Klevius PhD research on heterosexual attraction/sex segregation and opposition to female footballers (published in book form soon).
Klevius can no longer distinguish between the techniques of BBC and Nazi propaganda - can you!
Racist Theresa May is robbing EU citizens of their Human Rights
Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism
Klevius to dumb (or just evil) alt-left "antifa" people who support the worst of Human Rights violating evil:
True anti-fascism in its purest form is laid down in the Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. Islam (OIC) has in UN decided to abandon the most basic of these rights (the so called negative Human Rights).
Fascism is, according to Google's top hit, "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." 23 Aug 2017
So let's face islam with this definition.
A political philosophy, movement, or regime (islam) that exalts nation (Umma) and often race (muslims) above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government (Koran text/Mohammad's example) headed by a dictatorial leader (the caliph - e.g. the Saudi based OIC's Saudi leader), severe economic and social regimentation* (sharia), and forcible suppression of opposition (apostasy ban against muslims wanting to leave islam, and demonizing defenders of Human Rights by calling them "islamophobes").
And islamofascism gets away with it by calling itself a religion and thereby being protected by those very Human Rights it opposes.
* According to Cambridge dictionary, "extreme organization and control of people".
Human Rights is diversity - sharia is the opposite
The evil of Sharia islam is what makes it incompatible with Negative Human Rights (i.e. why islamic OIC violates Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia, hence excluding women and non-muslims from equality). The evil of islam and its origin may be easier to grasp with historical examples, e.g. the Origin of Vikings.
It's racism and sexism even if proposed by a "god"! Klevius altruistic virtual volunteering for the world community in defense of Universal Human Rights . Yes, I know, it's unfair. Klevius vs islam, i.e. Universal Human Rights vs Sharia (OIC) racism/sexism! Of course Klevius will win. The question is just how long we should allow the dying beast to make people suffer. (Negative) Human Rights is not a ”Western” invention! It’s where you end up when you abandon racism and sexism, idiot! After you have abandoned islam! Your confused islamophilia and ignorance about Human Rights make YOU an accomplice to islam's crimes! Whereas Human Rights work as egalitarian and universal traffic rules (no matter who you are or what you drive you have the same rights as everyone else) islam/Sharia differs between muslim men and the rest (women and "infidels")!
Have you noticed that when the history of slavery is (PC) debated islam is always excluded/excused? Atlantic slave trade and Roman slaves are eagerly mentioned while the world's by far worst, longest and most extensive one is blinked, as is the fact that islam not only sanctions slavery but is itself built on slavery and sex slavery (rapetivism)! The core idea of islam is the most thoroughly elaborated parasitism ever, i.e. what in 1400 yrs has made it the by far worst crime ever. But thanks to islamic teachings muslims are kept extremely ignorant about the evil origin of islam (institutionalized parasitism based on slave finance, rapetivism and pillage). Ohlig: The first two "islamic" centuries lie in the shadows of history. Klevius: There was no islam or islamic Mohammad (that's why the Saudis have levelled Mohammad's "grave" etc), only the evil murdering, pillaging and raping Aramaic-Arabic Jewish("Christian") led illiterate Arab thugs chasing for booty and sex. The "success" of this formula became later institutionalized and codified as a one way (Koran/Sharia) moral excuse (Allah) for further racist/sexist genocides. The bedrock and currency of this system was racist slavery. However, with Enlightenment the new idea of individual (negative) Human Rights emerged (incl. abolishing of slavery) and were, much later (1948), written down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights according to which everyone is equal no matter of sex, beliefs etc. Just like in traffic! But unlike traffic rules no one really seems to care about guarding our most precious asset as human beings. Instead racist sexist islamofascism (OIC and the Cairo Sharia declaration) is protected by Human Rights while they strive to undermine and eventually destroy these Human Rights! And most people don't seem to get it. Always remember, there is no islam without Human Rights violating racist/sexist Sharia. So a "vote" for Sharia-islam is AGAINST democracy and the freedom part of Human Rights!
Sayeeda Warsi (UK's non-elected OIC/Sharia politician) in essence doesn't differ from those muslim Saudi women who approve of sex slavery etc, other than that she is either ignorant or a traitor (against democracy and Human Rights) of the worst kind.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
What is islam, & is there a "moderate" islam?
Turkey is the richest islamic nation, & knocking on EU's door. Acccording to Turkish PM Erdogan "These descriptions (moderate islam) are very ugly. It is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and that's it."
Who is a muslim then?
According to brainless Wikipedia, "a muslim is an adherent of islam".
What is evil?
According to brainless Wikipedia: "Moral evil is the result of any morally negative event caused by the intentional action or inaction of a person."
Klevius conclusion: "Morally negative" may be conceptualized as something that is logically reprehensible on a general level (i.e. not on a specific level, e.g. that most people, even among muslims, have priorities in their relationships). Whereas the 1948 Human Rights declaration is based on Negative Human Rights, meaning that EVERYONE is included & without exclusions, Islam is exclusive & classifies people as unequal, e.g. muslim men, women/slaves, Abrahamists other than muslims, other "infidels". Not only that, but the very ideological initial essence of islam was pure evil piracy parasitism expanded by slavery & rapetivism (Sharia).
Is it racist & evil to ethnically classify people as a lower class?
Is it evil to force children from mixed marriage to become muslims, while denying it the other way round?
Is it evil to force or intimidate children to become/stay muslims?
Is it evil to support (or not criticize) a system that makes freedom of religion (apostasy) a crime?
Is it evil support (or not criticize) a system that not to allow others the same by referring to muslimhood as a superior race?
Is it sexist & evil to support (or not criticize) a system that doesn't allow women to choose whom they love (a muslim women IS NOT ALLOWED TO marry a non-muslim)?
Is it evil to support (or not criticize) a system that forces a non'muslim man to become a muslim if he loves a muslim woman (who most often has been made a muslim before she couldn't even talk)?
Is it evil to support (or not criticize) a totalitarian system that only accepts the expansion of itself? In fact, denies the equal right of existence of others.
Is it evil to be silent abt muslim rapes, murders, assaults, threats, intimidations, mockings, while immediately, for whatever trivial reason (i.e. a situation where a Westerner wouldn't stand a chance to be heard although equally "insulted"), abusing the Western legal system (which islam aims to destroy) when there is the slightest chance?
Is it evil to support (or not criticize) an islamic organization (OIC, i.e. all the muslim countries) which criminalizes criticism against itself?
Is it evil to "believe" in a book that is full of evil commands that need "explanations" & "interpretations" to look less evil?
Is it evil to believe in a "prophet" who commits all the worst sins known to mankind?
Is it evil to support muslim expansionist population growth when the resources are limited & the pollutions abundant already?
Is it evil to support muslim expansionist population growth when people affected by islam are among the worst off??
Is it evil not to recognize that most of an entire continent, Africa) has been developmentally destroyed under 1400 yrs because of islam?
Is it evil not to recognize that huge parts of Europe & Asia have been severely victimized because of islam? See e.g. how islam cooperated with the Vikings to drain white slave girls from Europe.
Can there be "moderate" muslims if there are no "moderate" islam?
Most "muslims" are probably ignorant abt islam, hence cannot be accused of evilness. However, those who start comprehending the disgusting roots of islam may, like many previous communists, be categorized in two main groups:
1 Those who are racist & sexist
2 Those who want to "reform" islam
The first group is clearly evil, while the latter group seems to have slipped away from brainless Wikipedia's initial definition as "an adherent of islam".
Klevius conclusion/suggestion: A removing of what is evil in islam (incl. Mohammed's immoral actions & Koran's immoral commands & advices) would castrate islam so badly that nothing meaningful could anymore fill the word islam. This means that some one Billion muslims ought to commit apostasy or, alternatively, that the word 'muslim' ought to be understood as a person (&/or his ancestors) who has suffered under islam (& those who have gained from islam may be called 'islamists').
From Freud to bin Laden
Personally I'm grateful because islam's unbelievable sexism has made it much easier for me to emphasize what I wrote in Angels of Antichrist 1996:
In 1897, the first female Nobel prize winner in literature, Selma Lagerlöf from Sweden, wrote in her novel Antikrists mirakler ("The Miracles of Antichrist") that socialism is the disguise of Antichrist, conceived as the power of evil in the mask of goodness. Lagerlöf, however, also described women voluntarily helping poor people while bearing the growing idea of socialism in their hearts. She ended the novel in a rather optimistic mood, saying that we need not fear Antichrist if we just place the picture of him beside the picture of Christ.
Although the simple Sicilian women in Lagerlöf’s novel, following the Good Samaritan, showed no signs of evil, they were certainly part of a movement that would become the most widespread political force ever. The question, however, remains; is it an evil one?
Neither Western oil money nor Sharia can stop the next revolution (the last & major) against sex segregation when enough women really see the horrifying painting they themselves have contributed to & have continued to transfer to their poor daughters. And many of them will continue to deny what they see. That's why we soon gonna see a full scale cultural "civil" war inside the female sex!
And for you guys who have wondered why feminists like islam, start digging From Klevius without love!