Afghan Taliban bans all images of living things
Posted by Sensitive-Mountain99@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 280 comments
Posted by Sensitive-Mountain99@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 280 comments
Vegetable-College-17@reddit
Just to emphasize how fucking crazy this is, this is quite possibly entirely unique to the Taliban.
You might get similar ideas from like, boko haram or something weirdos in Saudi Arabia and not even then.
This shit's crazy man.
Swordsman_Of_Lankhma@reddit
This is not unique to the taliban. A lot of Muslim states throughout history have outlawed art depicting living things. That is why islamic art is usually patterns without depictions of people.
Most Taliban policies are continuations of Iranic Muslim culture and traditional Islam. The taliban accurately represents the norms, culture of the persianate muslim world for the last 500 years.
Vegetable-College-17@reddit
My man, I am Iranian, living in Iran and have grown up in Iran.
You might want to save the horseshit for people who don't know any better.
Butsenkaatz@reddit
Coming from someone in Iran, that means a lot. fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck
LongjumpingTie3363@reddit
I often randomly scroll Reddit aimlessly without seeing the articles which pop up on my feed.
But this one made me pause and scroll back up because there is no way in hell this headline made sense.
Irrelevance351@reddit
Yeah, I had to read this one very thoroughly to make sure my eyes weren't deceiving me. More lunacy from religious fanatics. Unfortunately, the change in Afghanistan needs to come from their people, not outside forces.
Hobgoblin_Khanate@reddit
Unfortunately it’s outside sources, those coming from Pakistan that cause all this.
stevenbass14@reddit
Pakistan or not, Pashtunwali culture has existed for centuries and what the Taliban are doing is basically keep their old backward culture alive. It isn't exported culture.
benjaminjaminjaben@reddit
aye but at the same time it did hide out in Pakistan only to return. There's arguably a hypocrisy in permitting localised outside influences to completely ruin Afghanistan and oppress half its population but getting upset if international outside influences rebuild Afghanistan and liberate half its population.
stevenbass14@reddit
I'm not following.
You're saying the west tried rebuilding and liberating Afghanistan from the taliban?
benjaminjaminjaben@reddit
I'm saying that when the Taliban were kicked out that women were no longer oppressed to anywhere near the same extent. "Rebuilding" I'm basically just assigning to influx of American dollars.
What I'm saying is that arguably both forces are external to Afghanistan but we kid ourselves into thinking the Taliban are effectively "native" due to their slightly closer proximity.
stevenbass14@reddit
What the actual f? Like where do you guys come up with this....
Taliban was formed by two Afghan asf Afghans... and they adhere to Afghan nationalist mindsets and principles.
How do you get to the point where you state that the Taliban are not native. I really want to know what your thought process behind that is.
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Pashtun live in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, so they are native to both areas. The border is notoriously easy to cross. The national borders do not reflect the communities in that area.
Beatboxingg@reddit
Yah its just not fairrrrrr
benjaminjaminjaben@reddit
can't we look at Afghanistan today and ask ourselves whether its right that as a species we let this happen? I feel like these lines we draw to state who is or isn't allowed to do such things are somewhat arbitrary and not really the reasons we support/oppose such things.
ThevaramAcolytus@reddit
What happens within Afghanistan and the new (same as the old) Afghan government's domestic policies are ultimately a matter of internal affairs; internal to Afghanistan. We don't have to like or agree with the law at all or any number of their other policies, but individual countries are not governed by some world governmental body overseeing the development of the whole species. Because different countries have different needs and priorities at different stages of their historical development, there will always exist clashing ideologies, and so there is no consensus. Which is part of the whole reason we have countries and national borders. And as long as there are borders, Afghanistan can exist behind them and do what it likes in its own playground. Laws like this are ugly, but aren't bothering anyone else.
benjaminjaminjaben@reddit
which was invaded by forces from the tribal region of Pakistan.
Afghanistan's entire history is getting invaded from elsewhere.
ThevaramAcolytus@reddit
There were Pakistani volunteer fighters with the in the proto-Taliban and various factions of the Mujahideen during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Pakistan, alongside the U.S., ran Operation Cyclone to support the Afghan insurgency and some of those fighters, Afghan or otherwise, would go on to become Taliban. And Pakistan domestically has its own branch of the Taliban, Tehrik-i-Taliban which has had its own agenda and fought the Pakistani Army even while ISI (Pakistani intelligence) was supporting affiliated insurgents in Afghanistan.
But most of the Taliban officials and soldiers based in Afghanistan have always been native Afghans with their roots in southern Afghanistan and the Pashtun portion of the population. It has received foreign support, but never been a foreign invasion itself in the way that historical invaders to Afghanistan like the British Empire, Soviet Union, and U.S. were.
Beatboxingg@reddit
who didnt allow the US to invade afghanistan? good thing they did it anyway and allowed us and nato warplanes to kill a fuck ton of civvies! goshhhhhh and lets not forget opium poppy harvesting increasing a buttload
benjaminjaminjaben@reddit
I mean more like that nobody gives a shit about people and its more about what it costs and if there's a reason to care (e.g. 9/11 revenge). Otherwise all this pretend caring about civvies is just politically motivated theatre.
i.e. you wouldn't care if it didn't give you an opportunity to rail against US hegemony or whatever it is that triggers you.
Beatboxingg@reddit
westoid brainrot with a hefty serving of projection. but more practically its that my tax dollars were used to bomb weddings and fund what was ultimately a useless occupation. youre talking about me being triggered and youre here angry wojack crying over people shitting on failed military expeditions
and trust me i cant top this bit of broadway:
benjaminjaminjaben@reddit
Its half the people man, its really rough.
You've gotta end up with war fucking all the people to make it any worse.
it was useful when it happened and gave hope of something different for a generation. If both political wings hadn't abandoned it then perhaps it could have continued. It feels like sometimes the west doesn't have the necessary patience. I mean sure if you look at wedding bombings in a vaccum then you can never justify it, but when you put it up against this OP on the scales then how does it tilt then?
Logseman@reddit
The "west" (more like the neocon coalition that built the invasion) didn't intend to suppress the Taliban or uplift Afghan women. The invasion was not meant for that.
benjaminjaminjaben@reddit
that was the whole problem with it aye, revenge looking a just reason.
Beatboxingg@reddit
westoid brainrot, projection and extra idealism.
it tilted like it did for the us in vietnam lol hows that for scale?
Hobgoblin_Khanate@reddit
I remember allied soldiers saying 10+ years ago all the Afghan Taliban are long dead. Everyone they fight is from Pakistan
stevenbass14@reddit
I dont know how to reply to that. The Taliban are as Afghan as Afghan can be. To the point they endorse Afghan nationalism and call to reclaim the KPK province in Pakistan.
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Source for your blatant racism?
It's really foolish to think no people born in the UK have been radicalized. Think back a few years...
How many fighters for ISIS were UK citizens?
How many ISIS brides were UK citizens?
I'll tell you the answer, since facts aren't your strong point. At least 850 UK citizens traveled to the middle east to support ISIS. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/23/number-of-women-and-children-joining-isis-significantly-underestimated
Hobgoblin_Khanate@reddit
What’s ISIS got to do with the numbers in the Taliban over the last 20 years?
SqueekyOwl@reddit
I misunderstood which comment you were responding to. I thought you were attributing the pro-caliphate demonstrations in the UK to Pakistanis.
Hobgoblin_Khanate@reddit
Ah. I was referring to the Taliban in Afghanistan. I've heard time and time again most of the Afghan Taliban were wiped after a decade of allied bombings and rooting them out. That the steady replacements were from Pakistan, eventually being mostly made up of soldiers from Pakistan. The point being this goes against the idea of Afghan taking their own destiny into their own hands, rather than relying on the Americans
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Well, here's the thing. The borders in that region do not follow the shape of the communities who live there. Not now, and not when they were created.
Pashtun people - who are the core of the Taliban - live in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Naturally, when the US was in power, a lot of the Afghan Pashtun crossed the border (which is quite easy) into Pakistan. Then, when the US was leaving, they crossed back.
The same is true for the people in the northern part of Afghanistan, the Tajik, Uzbek, etc. It's no coincidence that the bordering countries are named Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
Here's a map that shows the approximate shape of communities vs the national borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The Durand Line is just another fuck up from British colonizers. The world might be a better place for everyone else in Afghanistan and Pakistan if both countries just let the Pashtun have their own little country.
Miiirx@reddit
Yes exactly, the more outside forces intervene or put up sanctions and so on, the more we'll push the people into the religion.
Vassago81@reddit
Yeah, because that worked so well in the past.
xynix_ie@reddit
They had their chance and didn't care, so why should we? Plenty of US lives paid for a freedom they don't want.
fajadada@reddit
And this is what the people in Germany are protesting for by protesting for a Caliphate.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
...... ... This has fuck all to do with Germany mate.
Relatablename123@reddit
Except there were Taliban flags flying at a massive gathering for a caliphate in Germany just the other day.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
So go bitch to the people flying them then. Or about them.
That's no one else's fault.
What about the word individual do you not get? Did you not see Monty Python? Did you hear the guy say "I'm not" and accidentally thought that was all the Muslims.
I have so little patience for this stupidity honestly.
Relatablename123@reddit
What an ignorant position. We have lived under these monsters and their Islam. We've seen how bad it is, and we escaped Iran to create a better life for ourselves. The people who attended that gathering and its related events are literally the same people who murdered our loved ones. Many IRGC officials have raised their families in the west and have influence over these movements. Morteza Barati, a mass murderer, is one of them.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
No. People are individuals. And no other Muslim is responsible for any evil action of any other one.
Don't be dumb.
ericrobertshair@reddit
Not all people who fly the flag of oppressive regimes and march for oppressive regimes and call for the implementation of oppressive regimes are oppressive regime supporters, is essentially your point.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
No.
That's not what I said. Obviously. And you know that.
Don't act in bad faith.
fajadada@reddit
Bullshit, you are shoveling it by the truckload. They want a caliphate. They want a islam world with religious laws. Some mullah passing his I-interpretation of a religious law. If I were a German woman now I would be organizing on the internet to counter these religious zealots at every possible opportunity.
fajadada@reddit
Same religions fanatics different country, mate . Has to do with any secular country that actually fought against these religious zealots to achieve a secular state. If you are actually Australian then think of living in a world with a mullah as your everyday watchdog .
Mike_Kermin@reddit
No. Not the same.
Different people.
Prejudice is stupid.
The adult population is fighting against both religious abuses and your crap.
It's multifaceted.
Logseman@reddit
How would an "intervention from outside forces" help when the outside forces had no intention of suppressing the lunacy in the first place?
ralts13@reddit
Kinda whack its the first time in awhile that I've read through the actual news article.
ThatHeckinFox@reddit
Abrahamic religions are batshit insane if left to fester unchecked...
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
Really? I thought it was a well known thing about Islam, it's why geometric patterns and calligraphy are so popular in Islamic art.
ThaiJohnnyDepp@reddit
Yeah but I thought the prohibition of iconography was limited to religious art. Unless it's all "religious art" now...
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
Remember that there is no distinction in Islam between the sacred and secular. It considers itself a complete system.
This seems to be a concept that many Westerners have difficulty comprehending, even though it is not a secret.
LongjumpingTie3363@reddit
So how do they work with missing persons?
NotAlNiani@reddit
Photography is halal by most accounts; it's drawings that are forbidden.
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Woman missing. Does not speak. Wears a burka.
godisanelectricolive@reddit
I guess detailed descriptions? Traditionally they made “portraits” of Muhammad by writing a physical description of him in ornate calligraphy(hilya) in a circle and frame. They also did “portraits” of sultans by writing their name with elaborate calligraphy. No government except the Taliban has actually tried to put this into practice in modern times.
Also, this isn’t really a Shia/Iranian thing. The Shia have always been into portraits and shrines for religious figures. You can buy portraits of Muhammad and Ali in Iran. It’s one of the many reasons why the Sunni may consider Shiites to be heretics. Persian influenced Sunni Muslim cultures like the Mughals and the Ottomans also made portraits of people in the past.
northrupthebandgeek@reddit
I'm sure some techbro could make millions using AI to turn photos of faces into descriptions and back as a "Sharia-compliant ID" product.
Whistle_And_Laugh@reddit
Or identification?
From_Deep_Space@reddit
IDs without pictures?
Sir_Penguin21@reddit
Did Allah stutter? It is evil.
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
Gawd knows, I doubt that was a concern when old Mo was kicking around.
ale_93113@reddit
Considering how many Muslims smoke and swear without thinking it is sin, many Muslims also have difficulty comprehending it
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
It's why I tend to make a distinction between Muslims and the subset of Muslims who are Islamists.
Sweaty_Address130@reddit
Do you? Cause to me it seems like you’re only doing so when called on it.
Constant_Charge_4528@reddit
Just like Christians there are Muslims that hold more strongly to certain beliefs while others less so.
Religion is honestly kinda just pick and choose what you want to believe in.
notapoliticalalt@reddit
It’s that…but based on the article, this is almost certainly about public control. I could see this being selectively enforced against political enemies. And it’s definitely meant to ensure the media can’t see what is going on.
Maxwells_Demona@reddit
Political enemies and women. The article mentions selective enforcement already being applied to women journalists in having to wear masks when on camera, while their male counterparts do not.
ThaiJohnnyDepp@reddit
Yeah, I saw the "soft restriction" being employed, which allows them to do anything they want.
zperic1@reddit
It has shifted in place in time but in general, modern understanding of Sharia, in general, prohibits any visual representations of living things... In general. Add lots of asteriks to this
MD-95@reddit
Which Sharia? Reddit like to use Sharia like it same type of rule that are defined and all muslims will follow when that can't be further from the true.
I live in a country of only 1.5mil people and even here not all people will agree on what Sharia is. Let alone letting one group like taliban represent more than 2 billion people.
Radiant-Fly9738@reddit
What is a well know thing about Islam? Where exactly did you get such ideas? hanging pictures of living things on the walls is prohibited, but just having a picture is not.
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
That's according to your preferred interpretation that is convenient for you. Is there really any difference between taking a photograph and painting though? One would expect that Mohammed's omniscient deity would have made it clear that photographs were OK back when he gave out his instructions.
Sir_Penguin21@reddit
This is actually a well known Muslim rule. Taliban is really just traditional Islam as practiced by Muhammad and Muslims for over a thousand years.
13th-Hand@reddit
Yeah ngl Islam is pretty terrible. It's like everything you don't want a religion to be that's what it is.
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
You're looking at it from the wrong point of view.
Imagine yourself as a 6th/7th century desert dwelling would-be warlord with a massive chip on your shoulder and a burning desire to get revenge on the people of a city that kicked you out. Now think of the rules that you would quite like to enforce on your followers and in particular your warriors.
What sort of rules would you come up with?
13th-Hand@reddit
I think I would probably involve miracles. Not really a rule but god seems pretty absent from the Islam faith.
I would have probably kept the blood sacrifices for sin. I mean if we're going back to the roots of the bible the old testament is filled with this.
I would have allowed women more rights.
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
Still not in the right mindset I'm afraid.
You don't want women to have rights because you really want them doing is breeding new warriors. You encourage polygamy for this reason too.
Drunkenness amongst soldiers is an age old problem so you ban booze but promise loads in the afterlife.
Getting soldiers to assault cities can be tricky so you promise riches in the form of loot and slave-women.
etc etc.
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Nope. It is specific to Sunni Muslims. It's not from the Koran, it's from hadiths.
Sir_Penguin21@reddit
So 90% of all Muslims. Right?
Mike_Kermin@reddit
No. You do not get to treat people with prejudice.
If you go to the progressive Muslim subreddit, you will find you can easily be Muslim and WAY more progressive than even you.
Maybe you should learn from those Muslims.
Sir_Penguin21@reddit
I love having a never Muslim Redditor tell me what Islam is and isn’t. Go on. Feel free to explain how the Quran and Hadith were unclear, I at least backed up my assertion. Quoting what Islam and Muslims say with sources isn’t prejudice. If you don’t like it maybe make the vast majority of them stop saying it. This is literally a majority opinion across billions of Muslims.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
Feel free to explain why a religious person's beliefs, choices or actions should be treated as non-important, to be replaced by whatever you imagine them to think, do or say?
That's right, we're in prejudice town. Population you.
And across the majority of you's, your stupid opinion holds majority too. But I'm not like you, I'm going to hate your stupid, stupid prejudice, but when you drop that, I won't get on at you for it.
That's your problem, you don't care, whether people actually think what you're accusing them of.
There's a difference between being critical of a religious, dogma or text and prejudice towards individuals.
Work it out.
Dangerous_Rise7079@reddit
Once God gets involved, reason leaves the building.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
No. It's just about stupid people being stupid.
There are more than enough religious people who aren't fuckwits, and non-religious people who are, to show your idea doesn't track.
Bramkanerwatvan@reddit
Yes. Those fuckwits are even more dangerous because they come across reasonable. Even if their religion is the opposite.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
Dehumanisation is the single most dangerous political idea. It's what the extremist Muslims do to justify persecute trans people.
Maybe you have that in common? Keep in mind we only recently got same sex marriage here. I'm sure NL wasn't far ahead.
The idea that hate politics is unique to other countries is a joke.
The second you don't care what is true, I don't agree with you.
Dangerous_Rise7079@reddit
Dehumanization is based on immutable human characteristics.
Your opinions on magical sky daddy are not immutable, they're just stupid. It's okay to make fun of stupid.
Full_Distribution874@reddit
And yet it's the most religious people who are the biggest fuckwits. Largely because believing in a god at all requires one to abandon rational thought.
Maybe_this_time_fr@reddit
Straight from r/atheism
Mike_Kermin@reddit
Yep.
south-of-the-river@reddit
Same, however I had to take pause at the subreddit name itself as well.
TheGreatSpaceWizard@reddit
I thought this was The Onion! What the fuck?
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Welcome to Afghanistan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniconism_in_Islam
ThaiJohnnyDepp@reddit
I thought it was /r/TheOnion
PITCHFORKEORIUM@reddit
Or the arguably more wild /r/NotTheOnion.
ArchTemperedKoala@reddit
I blinked a few more times to make sure I read them right...
SongFeisty8759@reddit
Oh they are more reasonable now, quite tolerant compared to some groups out there.. totally open to negotiation!
.../s
nowhsubo@reddit
You missed the Talibans episode 1, didn’t you?
ZuluRed5@reddit
Its crazy what men do before they consider therapy (sry, bad humor is the only way how I can digest this shit)
Interesting-Role-784@reddit
Yup, That’s not surprising at all, maybe what’s surprising is that They’re slow boiling the frog instead of frying it
Bacontoad@reddit
Covering its eyes first.
PrivilegeCheckmate@reddit
The problem clearly that we left too many living things when we left.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
That's mask off isn't it then.
Western_Paper6955@reddit
I had to doube check if this wasn't an onion article 😂
PUfelix85@reddit
I thought this was r/nottheonion for a moment. I keep both it and r/theonion in my news feed so I can feel that way every day. This time it wasn't from one of those two subs.
Known_Week_158@reddit
You made the mistake of thinking that rationality and Taliban polities match.
Adorno-Appreciator@reddit
What a garbage country.
American_Stereotypes@reddit
Once upon a time, Islamic society was a bastion of civilization and progress.
It's one of history's great tragedies that they've allowed themselves to stagnate and even regress into such barbarity. I feel for the women and however many sane men remain.
mylifeforthehorde@reddit
IIt just so happens many famous scientists , mathematicians, philosophers happened to part of the caliphates / kingdoms that supported their work through patronage. … but calling “Islamic society a bastion of progress is a bit much”. .. women have.. by most legal interpretations far fewer rights than men.
1jf0@reddit
Let's not pretend that this wasn't the case for women everywhere for most of human history unless they were part of a matriarchal society.
American_Stereotypes@reddit
At one point in time, Islam was actually pretty progressive in terms of women's rights because it explicitly gave them some rights and spelled them out, as opposed to some of its predecessor and rival cultures which gave no or fewer explicit rights to women.
This ended up backfiring on them as the notion of women's rights started to grow into them deserving equal rights, but their religion was stuck on the 7th century AD version of progressiveness.
redpandaeater@reddit
Yeah for instance the Khul' gave a possibility for a woman to divorce her husband. That's pretty progressive for the time period.
Empty-Ease-5803@reddit
In Iran you can technically abort, though it is not encouraged and rarely let it happen. I think they also let you work with embrionary cells but idk
Equivalent_Age_5599@reddit
Bro; the 7th century was 1400 years ago.
American_Stereotypes@reddit
Yes? I think I made it very clear I was talking about history multiple times.
DrafteeDragon@reddit
Most of these scientists were persan as well
Zipz@reddit
Fun fact most people in correctly believe Charles Darwin came up evolution while in fact the first ideas of evolution come from Abu Uthman`Amr ibn Bahr a guy who lived 1000 years before.
ryfye00411@reddit
This is a falsehood spread with good intentions. At best he identifies the idea of natural selection as existing but there’s no ideas of life diverging and changing into other life. To Al-Jahiz creation was perfect as is and all death and life makes sense in a grand vision of the universe. He’s probably one of the first to identify ecosystems and food webs in similar language to us. But the early evolution theory doesn’t exist in any writings of his that survive nor is it implied. If you still want to say what he recognized with weak animals being eaten by stronger ones as evolution you would need to acknowledge that Anaximander (over 1000 years before Al-Jihaz) believed humans came from animals in water (more accurate and specific a claim than Al-Jihaz ever makes) and even invented an early form of the scientific method to approach his ideas with.
Commercial_Ad_1135@reddit
His nickname is "The Bug-Eyed"? Am I reading that correctly? What an unlucky nickname to be historically known by...
Casual_Classroom@reddit
Are you able to understand the idea of a past and a present?
AlludedNuance@reddit
You left out their "once upon a time" meaning not now.
Puzzleheaded-Coast93@reddit
Yeah, it’s not like the United States provided weapons, training, and funding to religious extremists and put them in positions of power in order to gain control of the region’s resources.
__Khronos@reddit
Hmmmm I wonder what the cause could be 🧐
Sir_Penguin21@reddit
If you actually study the history the progress was made despite Islam, not because of it. The same as with the enlightenment in the west.
sieyarozzz@reddit
I don't know, the caliphate which connected tons of territories and the iranian world or north african world with the peninsula in some centralized government with the arabic alphabet and lingua franca surely helped the chance of scientists and progress to evolve in the region. And this region was connected through the islamic conquest and ideals
OddFowl@reddit
Eh.
Protestantism made it so the lay population in the West were taught to read, and they wound up reading radical works, but you wouldn't say Protestantism was part of the Enlightenment. Antithetical things can be productive in hindsight
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
It was certainly part of the English and Scottish Enlightenments.
OddFowl@reddit
When they were railing against religion?
sieyarozzz@reddit
That's funny, because there is a discourse (started by Weber) and I wouldn't say it's even that outdated, that Protestantism may have been part of the factors leading to the industrialization and capitalism of Northern Europe. The cultural changes and the things it may have driven are not characterized as Protestant, could be because it's not clear cut, but I personally have no issue in saying certain religion or schisms can truly change history and be a factor in the enlightenment or golden age.
ExaminatorPrime@reddit
Indeed, but Islam wasn't one of them. At the end of the Ottoman Empire, the Ottomans were about 100 behind in tech if not more in more backwater regions and missed out on the industrial revolution, mostly due to dogma and rigidity of government and thought.
OddFowl@reddit
A factor yes, the same way radical Islam can influence radical feminism in regions where women are dominated. Not exactly the intent though
hs123go@reddit
Many caliphs chose to subdue the Muslim clerics to make way for integrating people into their empire, instead of pandering to them or becoming one with them.
FaultElectrical4075@reddit
They’ve ’allowed themselves’ to(ignores six centuries of brutal global colonialism)
American_Stereotypes@reddit
You can't blame colonialism for everything. The failure of the Islamic world to adapt is their own.
Otherwise the rest of the world - especially places that were subject to far more brutal forms of colonialism than the Islamic world - would be just as backward, if not more so.
FaultElectrical4075@reddit
There is an undeniable connection between colonialism and the end of the Islamic golden age. And history is far more complex than ‘the more brutal the colonialism, the more backwards the victims will turn out’.
Do the Muslims hold some responsibility? Sure. But saying they’ve ’allowed themselves’ to become this way is not at all fair.
zabajk@reddit
What ? How Dora’s this even make sense tineline wise?
The Muslim world fell behind much earlier
Full_Distribution874@reddit
It makes sense if you start by trying to get from a problem to West = Bad.
zabajk@reddit
Which is also a symptom of too much success
ExaminatorPrime@reddit
The West and the EU in general are pretty much uncontested the best places on the planet to live. This is why you see so much vile hatred of our continent coming from everywhere, even many Americans. They hate how successful we are, how we don't need to work 60+ hours to not be homeless or go bankrupt for medical bills and how we get to be free and deny religious dogma of any flavour. It boils the blood of many people around the world. May we continue to best them throughout the centuries.
ExaminatorPrime@reddit
The Islamic Golden Age is a liberal myth. It never existed. Islam gained ground through brutal conquest, just like the Mongol Empire before them. Nothing advanced or enlightened about them.
American_Stereotypes@reddit
I think it's perfectly fair. If we were talking about the long-term economic impacts of colonialism, I'd definitely agree that colonialism set the Islamic world back significantly.
But culture is not economics. A nation can be poor and also accept that women have equal rights. They are making a conscious choice to reject cultural progress which has nothing to do with colonialism.
OddFowl@reddit
Culture and economics deeply inform each other.
When you say a nation can be poor and accept that women have equal rights, you'll find very few if any recognizable poor "nations" in history that produced that. Outside of matrilineal tribal societies this sort of thing was never enshrined on a meaningful level, arguably because mass poverty is the historical rule.
Not defending Islam at all, it's the scariest extant religion to me, but the economics of where Islam tends to dominate does inform the culture and vice versa. Basic Marxist view.
FaultElectrical4075@reddit
The cultural changes in the Islamic world are largely a reaction to colonialism. They have a (rightful) hatred of the west, and so rejecting what they perceive to be western values like Christianity and Progressivism in the strongest way possible is popular. This is why they have become fundamentalist Islamic theocrats.
Is this right? No. But it does have everything to do with colonialism.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
It very heavily depends on where in the Islamic world you happen to be talking about.
In most of the middle east, fundamentalist Islam is not a reaction to colonialism but a reaction to the total failure of secularist Arab/Persian nationalism to achieve societies that people would like to live in. That was the reaction to colonialism- Nasser et. al.
Afghanistan is different. Taliban rule is a reaction to the failure of the warlords, who were in turn a reaction to the insanity of the Afghan communist government.
American_Stereotypes@reddit
I disagree. Reactionaries are always to blame for their reactions. They're people just as capable of telling right from wrong as you and I, and they are consciously choosing wrong.
FaultElectrical4075@reddit
I’m not saying they aren’t wrong, I’m saying that colonialism holds some responsibility.
American_Stereotypes@reddit
Alright, fine. Colonialism holds a little responsibility. I'll amend my comment to reflect that. But, by far, the greatest portion of responsibility lies with the people choosing to reject progress in favor of oppression.
Happy?
fevered_visions@reddit
Wait, are we talking about Western colonialism, or all of the conquering that Islam did itself?
Full_Distribution874@reddit
A lot of Islam's history with colonialism is as the coloniser. The Ottoman Empire only died in the 1910s. Afghanistan and Iran were never truly colonized either.
ExaminatorPrime@reddit
100% true, Islam has a much longer history of conquests than the Crusades ever did.
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Six centuries of colonialism in the middle east? That's a bit much. A century or two, sure. But not six.
cndman@reddit
I knew reddit would somehow figure out how to blame this on white people.
whatsupbr0@reddit
It's not really a mystery. The west has supplied fanatic organizations, installed military dictatorships, and overthrew governments across the Islamic world
ivlivscaesar213@reddit
If only those Mongols didn’t burn Baghdad to the ground…
Western-Direction395@reddit
It still is in many senses. I don't think it's fair to say Afghanistan is representative of most Muslims. Just like the Congo isn't the shining representation of Christianity
roy1979@reddit
Back to the Stone Age IRL. I wonder what they will do about Wanted/Missing person cases. And how will they make police reports without photo of a person, just by description? I hope they realize it soon that implementing such outdated laws aren't feasible in this day and age before things turn too bad.
atreides_hyperion@reddit
Islam is a cancer in the world. It oppresses vulnerable people like women and children while promoting intolerance for other cultures.
Beatboxingg@reddit
then add Christianity and Judaism to the list lol
atreides_hyperion@reddit
Islam bans all images of living things, executes gay men, forbids women from being educated or leaving the home unattended.
By yet this simp thinks they're all the same.
Oppopity@reddit
Other religions have been perfectly capable of doing crazy shit too. They've just been lucky to undergo centuries of colonialism and economic hardship.
Bramkanerwatvan@reddit
Yes. But those other religions are toothless or a a shadow off their former selfs. Islam isn't. Its power is growing and its values and the societies that adhere to it arent going to change fast or something more western anytime soon. Islam is a lot less forgiving off outsiders then any other religion in its current form. And it has the power to act on it.
What your doing is calling the kettles black that are black, while not getting rid off the kettles.
As you come across with your comment (it doesn't matter if you think it doesn't, others do) it looks like you are down playing and ignoring the issue by saying other religions are bad too. Saying "the other also bad" does not negated the fact thats still bad. We are in the same boat. It all needs to be fixed or getting rid off. And islam is the giant angry bear in the room right now.
Did you change your flair from Australia to oceania?
Oppopity@reddit
The problem is religious fundamentalism flourishes in economically stunted regions. Singling out Islam is wrong because it isn't an issue inherent to Islam. If we could magically swap all those countries to be Christian they wouldn't stop executing gay people, they'd just adopt strict forms of Christianity that have existed before.
Saying it's a problem with Islam and not religious fundamentalism downplays all the struggles those regions have gone through and all the progress other regions have achieved.
No you must be confusing me from someone else.
JC090@reddit
I gonna put religions that don't execute gay men as better than the one religion that does.
Oppopity@reddit
Gay people have been executed by christians before though. It even says in the bible to stone them.
Uganda is a Christian country and they still execute gay men.
atreides_hyperion@reddit
Even the Catholic Church has become LGBTQ friendly.
Other religions have evolved with the times while Islam is stuck in the dark ages.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
Have you seen the Catholic sub?
LGBT friendly my ass.
Christian religion is exactly the same as Islam, it literally depends on the individuals, there are both LBGT friendly and hating groups in both religions.
Mysterious-Emu4030@reddit
There is like 10 countries which have law to execute gay people for being gays. 9 of them are islamic, the last one is Christian.
So guy, it's not because you know 1 islamic guy who is a bit more tolerant that it is representative of the majority of Islamic people.
Christianity is terrible but in most countries, it evolves. There was for example one Vatican council in the 1960s to get rid of all anti Jewish liturgy in Catholic church. There's no such reform in Islam. Jews and other religious minorities have always been treated as second rate citizens and that's still the carer in most countries like Iran, Pakistan, Irak but also Algeria, Egypt...
So please stop attacking any comment that criticise Islam because Islam as a whole deserve criticism. Islamic terrorism is a reality. Islamic oppression is a reality too. Sex/gender/sexual minorities, ethnic/religious minorities are discriminated by Islam which at its core is discriminatory. Just check Sura 4 in Qur'an about how women are treated in islam. Check the Haddits and what it says about homosexuality or religious minorities.
In islam, there's the idea that the text (Qur'an and sometimes Haddits) must be followed strictly and never questioned so most Muslim people have oppressive ideas about minorities because there is opressive ideas in qu'ran such as "women are inferior intellectually to men" (it's in Sura 4) for example.
It is the people that create religions not the opposite. Would the Muslims collectively try to change their religions, then it might become a progressive religion. In the meantime, Muslim people are not progressive, most of their ideas about religious freedom, gender/sex/sexual equality or freedom of speech are conservative and downright opressive to most.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
The comment I replied to was specifically wrong.
More so because it's not about fact, but about negative prejudice towards anyone of said religion.
Like I said, there is a progressive Muslim sub and it demonstrates that it's about the person.
Exactly. Which is why his take of
Is absolute prejudicial horse shit.
And why
Outs you as also aiming at prejudicial horseshit. You're not talking about the religion like I would, you're talking about "the Muslims".
atreides_hyperion@reddit
These are really good points and it is something we have to talk about bluntly without unnecessary emotion because it is reality and it's consequences are made manifest in our daily lives.
Sir_Penguin21@reddit
Both religion’s source materials explicitly call for the murder of gay people. Maybe read before commenting. Just because individuals ignore what their god says doesn’t mean much.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
Or, use your brain. The thing between your ears.
Because in both cases, it's not what god says that matters, it's what the person says.
I know, god's not real, we agree right?
So go with that idea long enough, to decide to evaluate people as individuals.
That way, you avoid stupid, stupid prejudice. And you get to be one of us, instead of trying your best to copy the behavior of the religious people who also find reasons to treat others with prejudice.
zabajk@reddit
Which is ridiculous, might as well close it down
Oppopity@reddit
The catholic church is not lgbtq friendly. They tolerate the existence of gay people but still think gay sex is wrong.
And again you wouldn't compare the Vatican city to Uganda would you.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
You're engaging in hate speech. There is a progressive Muslim sub on reddit that can teach you modern values about treating people as individuals.
You have catching up to do to those Muslim people.
OddFowl@reddit
Pardon me. Running to Iran right quick to get a proper progressive education
Mike_Kermin@reddit
You have all the facilities you need here to learn that prejudice is wrong.
Mysterious-Emu4030@reddit
And would you say you're not prejudiced in favour of Islam ?
Several people proved you that Qu'ran and the Haddits which all Muslim people - by definition of their religion - follow are discriminatory, yet you keep accusing others of being prejudiced. Why is it so much a bother to you that people denounce discrimination in Islam and from islamic people ?
You seem way more discriminatory and prejudiced than most comments you answer to are.
You seem to just defend Islam without actually knowing about it. You're seeming like a "white saviour". Islam does not need protection,it needs self reflection.
Mike_Kermin@reddit
No.
Nothing I said or think does that. And it's honestly a bit pathetic that you're at the point of begging for a gimme. I understand you view political like a game ya fasci wannabe but I don't. I understand you're actually trying to harm people and I'm into that.
You're why innocent people get abused and mistreated you know that don't ya?
Those people are fucking idiots. And I'm not responsible for that. I don't care how many stupid people quote stupid shit if at the end of the day you're using to defend prejudicial behaviour you're wrong by definition. If you can't work out the difference between prejudice and criticism that's not my fault is it?
If all you have is meme based political one liners fed to you by far right politicians I honestly feel pretty safe on that front.
So do you hot shot but as we can see that's a fucking challenge to prompt in people.
Embarrassing honestly.
appleshateme@reddit
Hell no, I'm active on that sub and lurk a lot, it's full of vile shi
Mike_Kermin@reddit
There's enough people saying good shit on there to teach you that prejudice doesn't check out. You shouldn't need a working example to log that one in but I'm trying to give you a hand out here.
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
Both of those are tempered by an acknowledgment that temporal power is to some degree separate - classically the "render unto Caesar..." verses in Christianity. Islam specifically precludes this church/state separation.
Maxwells_Demona@reddit
Right? How will people study anatomy? Medicine? Biology? Agriculture? Horticulture, if plants count? Every textbook ever published in those fields will have to be banned if they actually enforce this absurdity.
iDabbIe@reddit
Bold of you to assume the Talibam care about missing people
roy1979@reddit
It could be one of them
I-Here-555@reddit
No need to go that far. They might run into trouble with basic stuff like photo IDs (drivers licenses, id cards, passports).
It's a fascinating thought experiment to imagine a society without photos. It existed just 150 years ago, but is unthinkable now.
SqueekyOwl@reddit
Hey, at least they won't be using facial recognition cameras.
Nimitz-@reddit
They might do the whole court room sketch method, the "you cant film but i guess drawing is fine rule". Though frankly my guess is they just dont want people to have electronics at their home so that people cant access the outside world.
SqueekyOwl@reddit
No. Pictures include artwork.
TobiasH2o@reddit
I'm just curious how on earth they are going to keep enough doctors when all the current ones retire or leave?
ElLayFC@reddit
The certification threshold will drop and increasingly unqualified people will enter the field.
Own_Development2935@reddit
….And then Darwinism takes over, right?
ElLayFC@reddit
I mean, Afghanistan is already the last place in the world where there is wild polio IIRC. My guess is we see more stories like that
quaffee@reddit
Luckily, they can depict the polio, as a virus is technically not alive
Nimitz-@reddit
Well, usually science and religion tend to take different paths to medicine. I wouldnt be surprised if more "traditional" medicine thrives and science based medicine falls, Science based medicine doesnt usually thrive in poor countries anyways since people cant afford it. So yeah, my guess is the quality of the medical field will fall and traditional doctors and quacks take the place of modern medicine pra
v-punen@reddit
Drawing people is generally prohibited in Islam, so I'd assume it's the other way round.
YukariYakum0@reddit
No. Film isn't allowed either. Can't depict a living thing at all. That's why so much of their art is calligraphy.
roy1979@reddit
I agree
hazza-sj@reddit
Worse than that, the stone age is famous for depictions of animals.
stomith@reddit
They’re all dead by now, thankfully. You can depict them.
TheCursedMonk@reddit
Big Mo is long dead, still not OK to draw, so who knows.
Dinosaurs are long dead, it is probably heretical to draw them and say they were real. So must need to be recent, but dead.
OddFowl@reddit
Ah yes the prophet Mohamed is just the Biggie Smalls of the middle East lol
godisanelectricolive@reddit
By living they don’t mean currently alive, they mean things that can be alive. As in as opposed to inanimate objects.
Wolfensniper@reddit
So in their definition plants are not living things...?
stomith@reddit
Well that’s even stupider than I thought. :/
himmelundhoelle@reddit
It's stupid, but slightly less stupid than you thought.
cedriceent@reddit
It will be a new kind of Stone Age where the only thing allowed to be depicted are literal stones.
Numantinas@reddit
There's nothing stone age about this. Plato had similar views on art and it's likely this is where muslims get it from too to some extent.
chris_dea@reddit
Fantastic, Plato. How incredibly modern...
Beatboxingg@reddit
Why the snark? unless im mistaken he lived in the greco-roman age, antiquity etc so not the stone age
chris_dea@reddit
3000 odd years ago. Not exactly what I would want to consider my direct Inspiration. Hence the snark.
Beatboxingg@reddit
okayy
tacodepollo@reddit
Not known for critical thinking.
LaughWhileItAllEnds@reddit
Can someone ELI5 (because these morons clearly only have that level of intelligence) what the end goal of this is?
Children's books teaching animal names are now illegal; medical anatomy books are now illegal... From the earliest stages of development to the most important educational foundations needed to keep a society operating, everything is made worse by this ridiculous overstepping of power.
RockstepGuy@reddit
The end goal is to live like their holy book, holy laws and their holy traditions say, not too much mystery to it, they are religious fanatics.
The Taliban are probably the most outdated and backwards international government in place right now, so their version of Sharia law will be even more "traditional" than in other places.
They won't be a problem for the rest of us.. for now at least, but knowing Islam this is what they want for all of the world, so eventually we will have to deal with it.
OmericanAutlaw@reddit
this is an extreme oversimplification, if not just outright false. the taliban’s strict deobandi movement started in the 1990s. you seem to have made up your mind about certain people, but perhaps learn a little more about them.
RockstepGuy@reddit
I think one can separate most religions between 2 basic types: inclusive and exclusive, those inclusive are the ones who accept that their path may be right, but it's not the only one, Buddhism and Hinduism are decent examples, some reformed christian branches could also fit.
And then you have exclusive religions, those who say that their path is the only right one and everyone else is wrong, Evangelical Christians and Islam fall into this category.
Eventually, the goal of exclusive religions is to "conquer" the world, Evangelicals for example see it as their duty to expand "the good news" or the gospel, and to reach out everywhere and everyone in order to "help people" see the real god.
In the case of Islam however, it is the most "dangerous" of them all, since their religion is viewed as the one "above all", this means Islam will never be wrong, Judaism and Christianity are considered earlier versions of Islam, while the rest are either incomplete or corrupted religions.
Mohammad was the final and real prophet, and his word will remain true forever, i doubt we will ever see a real change in Islam, it will always be this way, at was conceived to be like this.
I have no doubt in my mind the rest of humanity will in some kind of way clash with Islam at some point in the future if things continue this path, in fact i would argue we are already in a way doing it.
I have no problem with people who believe in Islam tho, but of course that doesn't mean i will shut up and not talk about some (in my opinion) very real future.
OmericanAutlaw@reddit
wouldn’t that be true if any exclusive religion? in the same way, accepting Christ as the Lord and Son of God is mandatory in christianity, and anything else is objectively wrong. both religions evangelize, and by your logic it doesn’t matter if it’s one sect or the other. it seems like a very bleak, and frankly retarded way of looking at the future. there will never be only one prevailing ideology.
RockstepGuy@reddit
The diference is that Christianity can change over the years and has changed in many ways and branches, again, you still have things like the evangelicals, but for example, the second vatican council in the 60s managed to "reform" the catholic and "primary" branch into being less "we are the only truth" mindset, accepting that other christian branches may also have truth in it, and even focusing on reforming the relationships with other religions like Judaism and Islam, to help "in understanding each other".
Islam however, doesn't have the same religious structures (at least the Sunni world, wich is most of Islam anyways), the chances of Islam going trough a reform (one that makes it less like today at least, since you can also go backwards) are basically none.
And of course, Islam is the strongest exclusive religion, and also the one that is outpacing every other major religion while being spread all across the globe, not only confined to one piece of land, it is also the most prone to radicalism in this day and age, a dangerous combo.
That we will have to see, men eventually die, politics change, empires crumble, but religion is the word from god itself, if there is one thing that can unite all humankind for centuries to come, it is religion.
TruthsiAlwaysTold@reddit
I think we should import another 200 million islam refugees
LaughWhileItAllEnds@reddit
What a terrifying and absolutely bizarre future ahead...
you_wizard@reddit
Apparently it is haram specifically to depict the head of a human or animal. You could probably get away with a medical anatomy book featuring headless models, and partial diagrams of systems within the head such as the inner ear.
https://fitrahtawheed.com/is-drawing-haram
Yeah, pretty goofy.
Temporal_Somnium@reddit
Seems like it’s just for news stations
Butsenkaatz@reddit
These are simply old men who can't bear the idea that someone else SHOULD be running things and WILL NOT let go of power; they're benefiting from this, they're not going to just let it go.
fevered_visions@reddit
To force virtuosity according to their religion and any real-world consequences are apparently worth it, I would think.
GMu_the_Emu@reddit
I'm sure a large part is a desire to keep the populace uneducated, then they aren't empowered to question you or seek to improve their lot too much.
Tried and tested despot behaviour.
zQuiixy1@reddit
I dont actually think thats the case here. These people are 100% true believers in this stuff. They dont do it out of some secret desire for power but because they truly believe they are following the word of god
Yeahhh_Nahhhhh@reddit
It’s basically a state cult now. It’s not dissimilar to other religious cults except for the fact that the cult is the state.
shadowsofthesun@reddit
Presumably, those things could still be described. Presumably, the end goal of this is control over the population by the warlords and people at the top of their individual hierarchies, such that they can extract a modicum of wealth, power, or glory from the people. Yeah, it sets the entire society on a path to outright failure, but their holy book said it's cool and keeps the people in line on the path to righteousness.
allaboardthebantrain@reddit
tl;dr: The Taliban accidentally bans the internet.
I'm sure this won't have any political consequences from unmarried men who suddenly won't have access to internet porn. I can't imagine that they would cause any trouble in a country where every household has an AK47 as a matter of course.
godisanelectricolive@reddit
Only 15% of Afghans have basic internet access and not necessarily in their homes. It’s a bit higher for men, as high as a quarter, and as low as 6% for women.
The Taliban is making it easy for men to get wives though by making it impossible for women to do anything without a husband. There’s a record number of child marriages with fathers selling their own daughters into marriage out of desperation due to increased poverty.
allaboardthebantrain@reddit
Easier to get wives. Every polygamous society will inevitably have a problem with excess males with no access to sex. Left alone that will result in social unrest, high crime and revolution. The two classical solutions are: turn your poor young men into eunuchs, or send them off to war to either win and bring back war brides or lose and die off to a socially sustainable level.
The modern solutions are Terrorism and Porn, and they're trying to get rid both. The Taliban has a big problem.
OkGear4296@reddit
The third solution that you are missing is the one that most societies that accept male polygamy actually choose: most men and women will be in monogamous relationships, and only very small portion of mostly elite men will be in polygamous marriages.
allaboardthebantrain@reddit
Sure, okay. 2- 9% of muslim households, depending on the country, have multiple wives. So let's say it's only 2%, and the top 2% have an average of three wives, because the legal limit is four in a lot of places now. The top 2% have cornered 6% of the female population, leaving 4% of the male population without any possibility of marriage.
Afghanistan is a country of 44 million people. That's a million incels who will never get laid no matter how hard they work. And who can they blame? They're definitely going to blame someone.
I suspect the Taliban will wind them up and point them at Iran to go be martyrs over there.
shebang_bin_bash@reddit
Pakistan is a more likely target because there’s majority Pashto-speaking territory to conquer and a lot of sympathizers in the general populace compared to Iran. India might be willing to assist, too.
allaboardthebantrain@reddit
Iran is currently flexing on Afghanistan and treating it like a colony while infringing on its water rights. The Taliban HATE Iran right now.
CaveRanger@reddit
It's the same problem Iran faces. They want to be a state with a modern military, nukes and jets and such, but they also want to be at traditionalist islamic state who's society is locked in around 600 AD.
You eventually run into the issue that there aren't many nuclear physicists who are also fundamentalist religious sorts who want to live in a society that bans graven images. Plus, restricting women from those roles means you're limiting your pool of recruits even further.
PITCHFORKEORIUM@reddit
Iran have a bonus problem of any nuclear scientists being obvious targets for assassination by Iran's primary target. Israel. Who absolutely haven't assassinated high-value targets inside Iran or flipped Iranian security agents before, if anyone asks.
Iran's current messaging to the region, "don't allow Israel et al to use your airspace or we'll be very very angry please and thank you", implies they're slowly learning it was a bad idea to fuck with the Jews on the block. Took 'em a while, and seems Israel did not appreciate the delay.
The region has seen what Islamic extremist terrorism looks like. Even Iran tasted its own medicine when ISIS blew up Soleimani mourners.
To bring things back to topic, I don't see Afghanistan becoming a place for anything other than festering extremists that no-one wants. That won't end well for Afghans and will be even worse for its neighbours. It squandered it's best chance at becoming a more modern cohesive state. Heartbreaking for those good people in Afghanistan who aren't extremist loons.
ngyeunjally@reddit
That’s why there’s still tribal warfare
TrumpsGrazedEar@reddit
tistimenotmyrealname@reddit
Most men are animals who kill if they dont masturbate enough.
Sincerely yours, almost an animal
livinginanimo@reddit
This is always on my mind and you happen to be the comment that brought my questions out into the world. Very sincerely: Is this a serious comment or a joke? Aren't men embarrassed or upset by this narrative? Like, you go outside as a man and strangers probably look at you and treat you with wariness, like you would a wild animal. Maybe they clam up when you try to talk to them, maybe they cross the street when they see you coming. Aren't you bothered by it? Or is that actually the reality of being a male, that one day you could just snap and people are right in being afraid to see you coming.
Melkor7410@reddit
One of the first things the Taliban did as they were gaining control in Kabul and other places was go around and confiscate guns. Because they knew without guns, it'd be so much harder for the people to revolt. Dictatorships never want an armed populace.
Previous-Process5182@reddit
No no. Afghan men are holy and do not partake in such horrible western sins as pornography. This will have no effect at all /s
forestball19@reddit
Well, this is what the Afghans wanted. Rape and killing on their daughters and wives. Total submission required from all females, death on all gays. Oh, it’s NOT what all the Afghans wanted, you say? How come that US and their allies didn’t make more progress during their run in Afghanistan, then? How come it took only a few days for Taliban to enter Kabul when US and their allies exited? That back then, is proof: The vast majority wanted this.
Should they now regret their folly, they don’t deserve my sympathy. If they want change, they can have their bloody revolution without western aid now. It’ll be much harder than if they’d cooperated back then, and it’ll require much more sacrifice. But that’s what they wanted, so let’s just all stay out and close the borders.
As for the Talibans, they should know what a revolution will look like and that it’s now unavoidable. Each and every Taliban leader and soldier will be slaughtered and many will be tortured to death. That will also be well-deserved and the West should stay out of that too.
Pitiful-Tip-4881@reddit
"...they dont deserve my sympathy..."
Who the fuck are you again?
-Zipp-@reddit
You gotta take a break off the internet man god damn.
Karrnis@reddit
I'm a Muslim, and what the sigma am I reading?!1?!1!1?!1
Banning drawn pictures is tolerable and all but photography?! What madhab do they follow lmao
Private_HughMan@reddit
So how will news work? Anchors and guests won't be allowed on screen? What about politicians? No photos of them at all? And what about biology books?
And what about this sentence that I had to write to meet the minimum character count?!
bitterberries@reddit
I appreciate that your outrage for sentence minimums is part of a running diatribe on the evils of the Taliban.. And I too feel the unholy wrath of the minimum word count in order to express my appreciation for your frustration.
godisanelectricolive@reddit
There isn’t an image of the leader of the Taliban and the Supreme Leader of Afghanistan except for an unverified passport photo from 1990 released by the Taliban that outside sources hadn’t been able to verify as him.
He very rarely makes public appearances. He didn’t appear in public until nearly a year after taking power and then only appeared to deliver a sermon with his back turned to the audience while standing in a crowd. People were forbidden from photographing him and some audience members said they just heard his voice, they didn’t even spot where he was standing. He met one foreign dignitary since taking power, the Prime Minster of Qatar and it was in a secret meeting with no cameras or reporters allowed.
OfficeSpankingSlave@reddit
He sounds smarter than Hamas and Hezbollah so far.
dalerian@reddit
I doubt they see any value in any of those things.
armchairracer@reddit
How will they even issue IDs? This law is absolutely mind bogglingly dumb.
ElLayFC@reddit
The functionality of all those systems will degrade, adding to the power of the theocrats.
adiggittydogg@reddit
This is a relief cause I started to think this sub likes stuff like that.
Also the minimum length requirement for top level comments is silly. What does 150 characters actually look like anyway?
Devilsgramps@reddit
So, theoretically, if an Afghani sends a picture of his cat to his friend with the caption 'Isn't my cat cute? Bless Allah for creating cats 🙏🐱', that's grounds for a stoning?
ThevaramAcolytus@reddit
Yeah, I just saw this earlier today and was honestly more taken aback then I have any business being. I think that I'm just surprised how quickly they've moved, incrementally and methodically, to the reversion back to the period of 1996 - 2001 and full implementation nationwide of their ideology. Yes, it's in increments but it's unapologetic and quite fast considering the scale and change this represents for the younger generation of the past 20 years.
Well, I'll continue to say on this what I've been saying all along: The policy is a disgusting product of a disgusting ideology. This one in particular is so anti-intellectual, anti-artistic, anti-expression, and anti-thought that I'll never stop thinking it's one of the worst concept any group of humans ever conceived of.
But their country, their rules, and no one else has a say in the matter now.
A_Light_Spark@reddit
I think I understand why and I even see the appeal. Still life and landscapes are always two of my fav genres anyway.
Terrible ban tho. Time to get autosexual I guess.
Son_of_Sophroniscus@reddit
Say what you will, this is the legacy Biden and Harris leave on the world. Pathetic.
TruthsiAlwaysTold@reddit
having the legacy of leaving behind a war that wasnt ours nor would benefit everyday americans behind is a good legacy actually. Were not the police of the world and we shouldnt be why must we stress ourselves with the actions of a nation that is across the world oppressing its own people which can lead to unrest and wars for their own country while also not harming us in any way?
Biden getting americans out of Afghanistan was the best thing he did
Son_of_Sophroniscus@reddit
The manner in which he surrender to terrorists was the biggest disgrace in American military history, yet, we can agree, it might have been his greatest achievement compared to his and Kamala's other acts in office.
Demonking3343@reddit
You do understand it was trump that signed the agreement to pull out originally right?
huncho3055@reddit
It’s hilarious how un educated some people are in this matter just to smear other politicians name in the dirt
huncho3055@reddit
America never belonged in Afghanistan in the first place, everyone should be happy that those deployed are back home
empleadoEstatalBot@reddit
Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
ConflictWeary5260@reddit
This is actually islamic. It sounds ridiculous but is it genuinely harmful to cross out a furries eyes before posting it? Yeah ik the taliban are ugly and kill ppl but that aside
coverageanalysisbot@reddit
Hi empleadoEstatalBot,
We've found 28 sources (so far) that are covering this story including:
Arab News (Leans Right): "Afghan Taliban vow to implement media ban on images of living things"
RTÉ (Center): "Taliban to impose media ban on images of living things"
Raw Story (Left): "Afghan Taliban vow to implement media ban on images of living things"
Of all the sources reporting on this story, 40% are left-leaning, 20% are right-leaning, and 40% are in the center. Read the full coverage analysis and compare how 28+ sources from across the political spectrum are covering this story.
I’m a bot. Read here to learn how it works or message us with any feedback so we can improve the bot for you.
Gantzz25@reddit
The title for this article is misleading. Here’s an excerpt from the article:
ronburgandyfor2016@reddit
Yes the Taliban is most definitely going to be only convincing no coercion at all
icyserene@reddit
That’s what they always say. They said women would be “advised” to cover. Even if persuasion was one Talib’s original intention, Taliban is famously inconsistent with applying rules
69_queefs_per_sec@reddit
They will persuade them with an AK-47, but following this new rule will be completely optional, of course.
ahappydayinlalaland@reddit
This is basic stuff why are people acting surprised? There are hadith that specifically condemn and prohibit images of living things. The taliban is doing what they always said they would do, enforce sharia as they understand it.
adiggittydogg@reddit
This is a relief cause I started to think this sub likes stuff like that.
Also the minimum length requirement for top level comments is silly. What does 150 characters actually look like anyway?
Lacedaemon29@reddit
This generation of Taliban are more strategically smart, they implemented all just like the first generation but more slowly and under curtains (only what is left is mass executions on stadiums).
whatisthisnowwhat1@reddit
Well that is definitely a take to have....................................
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20325/is-keeping-pictures-prohibited-in-islam
SpoppyIII@reddit
Okay so, let me get this straight.
Photography and video of living things is now fully banned? So now it's essentially illegal to document events that are affecting people in the country using images? Am I understanding?
autumnsdanceintesity@reddit
They are trying to ban everything, in doing so nothing will exist..it will open a vortex in time causing the taliban to become the coolest kids around. Everyone will want to vacation there and it was boost their economy...until they ban all money$$$ and tourism.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
Doing their best to return to 1994. Not clear whether it will work- Afghanistan is sill underdeveloped, but it is infinitely more cosmopolitan than it was 30 years ago...
oofersIII@reddit
1994? Try 19,940 BC
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
Taliban instituted all of these rules the first time it took over, in 1994