French report warns of spread of Muslim Brotherhood ideology

Posted by HummusSwipper@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 460 comments

[-]

MrCollection8159@reddit

The French report is a wake-up call. The Muslim Brotherhood has mastered the art of ideological stealth. They don't need weapons to dismantle democracy—they use associations, funding networks, and social services to indoctrinate vulnerable populations. This isn’t religious practice — it’s long-term political subversion disguised in moderate tones. France is right to act decisively.

[-]

MrCollection8159@reddit

The Brotherhood knows how to play the long game. They infiltrate, influence, and indoctrinate. While politicians debate semantics, they embed their ideology deeper into our schools and communities. Enough talk. It’s time for action.

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

I'm French. These people are the brown bottom of our politics. Muslims represent about 10% of the French population and have almost no political representation. Saying they represent a threat is just ridiculous. France is going through the biggest wave of Islamophobia in years. Even the center and the right no longer hesitate to use the vocabulary and ideological concepts of the far right. You shouldn't believe this bullshit. In France, Muslims are more victims of exclusion than anything else.

[-]

testman22@reddit

I'm Japanese and have no connection to France, but objectively speaking, I definitely think France has a problem with Muslim immigrants.

Liberals seem to be defending Muslims, but they should understand what will happen when they become the majority. Their doctrine is not as tolerant as yours.

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

So you're on the other side of the world and you think you can have a more precise opinion on the French situation while I live there? OK. We've been living with Muslims since France existed as a country and there's no real risk that Muslims will one day be the majority in France. In my opinion, if it continues like this, we're more likely to put them in camps. The Muslims I meet are neighbors, friends, colleagues and French people like me. Don't copy your visions of a clash of civilizations when we just want to live in peace alongside each other.

[-]

testman22@reddit

Interesting logic. Do you think Trump supporters have a good grasp of the situation in America?

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

You're right, people who live in a territory don't necessarily have a very realistic vision of it. On the other hand, certain statistics are quite clear on the question you are asking. There is nothing to indicate an exponential increase in the number of Muslims. They have long been part of the French population (linked to France's colonial history) and they remain a minority in terms of the population and have a non-existent influence on laws or morals.

[-]

testman22@reddit

From what I've researched, 13% of the French population is now Muslim, the highest percentage in the EU?

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

Islam is the second-largest religion in France after Christianity. As of the most recent estimates, it is followed by approximately 9 million people, accounting for about 13% of the national population. This represents a steady increase from 2023, when Muslims comprised around 10% of the adult population—approximately 6.8 million people—according to data from INSEE.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/

France also received more than half a million Muslim migrants – predominantly regular migrants – between mid-2010 and mid-2016, while 400,000 Muslims arrived in Italy. The two countries accepted a combined total of 210,000 refugees (130,000 by Italy and 80,000 by France), most of whom were Muslims.

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

The explanation is quite simple: France has always maintained strong migration links with its former colonies: Morocco and Algeria. At the time when France was still an empire, Islam was already the second religion.

Since people from these former colonies are often accustomed to French or speak it, it is normal that they turn to this country when they want to emigrate for better economic conditions. Estimates today give about 8% of the French population that is Muslim (studies are imprecise because studies on religious orientation have been prohibited since the collaboration) and is projected with a small increase to reach 15% by 2050. Still not enough to have a real political influence except if the rest of the population gives them access to it.

I find it a bit strange to have some of my compatriots complaining about this migration today when we dominated their country for more than 150 years and created the conditions for this migration (difficult economic situation due to colonization and ease of language). Moreover, many things have been influenced by the Maghreb, food, music, and even the language: the majority of French people use vocabulary derived from Arabic. So to summarize 1. no exponential increase in the number of Muslims 2. they are historically part of France and seeing them today as foreigners when we have heard for years the far right say that Algeria is French is a bit tiring. Thank you for coming to my TED

[-]

testman22@reddit

Estimates today give about 8% of the French population that is Muslim (studies are imprecise because studies on religious orientation have been prohibited since the collaboration) and is projected with a small increase to reach 15% by 2050

What's your source? You seem to be actively downplaying the problem. There's data that says it's already at 8.8% as of 2016. And you contradict the data I've already posted.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/11/29/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/#:~:text=France%20and%20Germany%20have%20the,Muslims%20in%20Germany%20(6.1%25).

If you are underestimating the current situation, it is not surprising that some people think otherwise.

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

Basically, where other countries have census files, like Germany and Austria, in France it is forbidden so they do it from samples which have a much higher margin of error. I stick to my position that the Muslims of France do not represent a threat in themselves and especially since they have no political existence or influence on laws, administrations or institutions. And the rest of the population is so Islamophobic and fairly racist that it is not likely to happen.

[-]

testman22@reddit

If the error is large, why do you believe the smaller number and not the larger one? Is there any basis for this?

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

because taking the highest stats serves a discourse that serves the interests of a political class in search of moral panic and scapegoats for their xenophobic and racist policies. But whether it's 8, 10 or even 20%, it's still not enough to pass laws or have any influence on laws or morals, so nothing to worry about. Demographic trends are long. If in 2019 there was nothing shocking, it hasn't changed in 7 years. As a French, honestly, I think that my country has real problems with the impoverishment of the middle and working classes, so I might as well tell you that the Muslims who are my neighbors, my friends, my colleagues, I have no problem with them, so I'm not going to start worrying about the xenophobic delusions of a political class that has nothing else to do.

[-]

testman22@reddit

So you're underestimating the numbers because of your political views? That's not a very logical thought.

But whether it's 8, 10 or even 20%, it's still not enough to pass laws or have any influence on laws or morals, so nothing to worry about.

Is that so? A difference of 2% of the population is a pretty big difference. To start with, the 10% estimate is for adults. If children are included, the figure rises to 13%, as Muslims have a much higher birth rate than the general French population.

And the problem for Muslims is not as simple as just changing to Sharia law. The problem with Muslims is that they have the organized vote. They will tell their followers what to vote for, which will have major consequences for French democracy. And their interests will be Muslim interests, not French interests.

For example, such an organization has already been established in the UK.

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

The Muslim Vote is a British pressure group established in December 2023 which seeks to support candidates who oppose the Conservative and Labour leadership stances on the Gaza war among other policy positions.

A survey of Muslim voters reported that 86% voted Labour in the 2019 general election. After Labour initially supported Israeli military action in the Gaza war following the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, support for the party fell among Muslims, with a poll by Survation finding only 43% saying they would vote Labour in the next election.[1] BBC analysis of the 2024 local elections results said that Labour voteshare had fallen 21 percentage points in council wards where more than 20% of residents are Muslim and analysis by Number Cruncher Politics found that Labour lost 33 percentage points in majority-Muslim areas.

Do you look at this and think they have no political influence?

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

The issue for me is not to deny the data. Just to say that it is unreliable and therefore difficult to use in a context of instrumentalization of these questions by far-right, right-wing and centrist parties. I do not see any change in society on my scale that allows me to observe a growing influence of Islam in France, so I logically allow myself to think that there is little or no issue. And since everyone seems very concerned by this issue, even if I am wrong, I have no concerns about the means deployed to fight against an hypothetical islamization of my country.

And I don't know, if the only political influence they have is to hold England to account on Gaza. I admit that I'm on their side on this one and if they organize themselves on this issue, so much the better. And obviously it's not really a success, so the "influence" of Muslims seems quite questionable to me.

I would also add that saying that Muslims have a much higher birth rate is more of a prejudice than a statistic. For first-generation immigrants, this is the case, but not only for Muslims, and their birth rate returns almost to the French average in the following generation. Moreover, the idea that they have an "organized" vote is strange. Do all Muslims vote the same way? No.(30% voted for the current president and 70% for the FI in the last elections with radically different programs and ideologies). And don't other religious movements or other interest groups also give voting instructions? Of course they do.

In France, the political party that brings together the most Muslim votes is the FI, and it is precisely because they have positioned themselves on Gaza and Islamophobia, and it is also the one I vote for because even without being Muslim, we can find it normal to ask France for accounts on its links with Israel. The issues that affect Muslims can also affect the rest of the population.

And when was France going to have these kinds of riots at the World Cup? In 2022? The people going crazy at that time were Moroccans too lol

https://www.timesofisrael.com/celebrations-some-unrest-after-france-bests-morocco-in-world-cup-semis/

Morocco’s loss to France at the World Cup in Qatar on Wednesday night was met with anger and rioting by some in Paris and Brussels, though overall reactions to the game were largely peaceful.

Around 10,000 police officers were mobilized across France to ensure there was no unrest during and after the match, given the potential of clashes between French supporters and those backing France’s one-time North African colony.

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

Do you read French? I have an article on hand that contradicts the one you posted: the methodology seems quite confusing. Once again, figures about the exact number of Muslims are difficult to obtain and estimates can vary greatly. If you want, I can put it through Google Translate, but I'm not sure it will work well with this kind of article. https://www.icmigrations.cnrs.fr/2019/04/17/defacto-6-005/

[-]

testman22@reddit

I translated it and read it, but nowhere does it give the figures you claim. There are estimates for 2050, but these are estimates without immigration.

And the article was written in 2019, so I don't think it accurately captures the current situation.

[-]

deleted_by_reddit@reddit

[removed]

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

The comment you submitted includes a link to a social media platform run by fascist/authoritarian oligarchs and has been removed. Consider re-commenting with a link using alternative privacy-friendly frontends: https://hackmd.io/MCpUlTbLThyF6cw_fywT_g?view

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

Yup but i'm in the west with a great majority of westerner thinking basically the same. Fondamentalists will never outnumber us. France is a very secular country and it is not threatened by religious fundamentalism. Fundamentalists (whether Muslim, Catholic, Jewish, or otherwise) have no political representation and have no influence on the laws in France.

What worries me is that the trend is going in the other direction. Under the guise of secularism, we are witnessing a full-scale attack against Muslims based on nothing (even if there are problems, they are minimal and very closely monitored). To give an example, certain Muslim high schools have had more than 14 inspections by the national education system, while some Catholic high schools have never had any inspections despite problems with pedophilia.

So clearly, even if religious people have a rigorous vision that is not mine, they are obliged to conform to our vision of religion, otherwise they violate laws that they do not have the capacity to circumvent or modify. So even if the vision of religion is relative, the laws are not and they are close to what I described. Everyone has their own religion and you don't bother others with that.

The problem today is that the state is trying more and more to make exceptional laws only to stigmatize Muslims and make them scapegoats for the catastrophic policies of our governments in recent years.

[-]

Electronic-BioRobot@reddit

It is surprising, that Charlie Hebdo case, didn’t teach you anything.

[-]

Netsuko@reddit

Almost all of Europe is in absolute denial out of fear of being labeled Islamophobic.

[-]

NovaKaizr@reddit

There is definitely some of that, and then there are those of us who realize that "they are bad people, their culture is barbaric and fundamentally incompatible with ours" can be used to describe centuries of jewish history in Europe.

The target may be different but a scapegoat is still just a scapegoat.

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

Good God, can't you stop talking shit? Linking the Bataclan and Charlie Hebdo attacks to all Muslims is just tiring. Would you find it normal to call all Catholics pedophiles? Because there are probably more cases of pedophiles in the Church than cases of terrorism among Muslims. Once again, I am an atheist and the point is not to say that there are no fundamentalists. But in France, you have to understand that Muslims are taking so much flak in terms of control and surveillance that I would be much more relaxed about sending my children to a Muslim high school than to a Catholic high school. Honestly, if you don't want to live with people who are different from you, just bury yourself in a hole and stop annoying those who want to live in peace.

[-]

NovaKaizr@reddit

Did you reply to the wrong person? Because I agree with you

[-]

nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit

Yeah got kinda confused by the avalanche of right-wingers. sorry

[-]

Netsuko@reddit

I am not denying that, but you are also just trying to counter me with whataboutism. Two wrongs don't make one right.

Also, I never said "they are bad people". You are just putting words in my mouth here now. Being a bad person and having an incompatible culture or worldview is not the same thing. Right now you are generalizing things.

Scared-Host5035@reddit

Imo religion is no longer compatible with liberal and secular ideologies of countries that are good to live in, have secular politics and have a liberal bent.

Be it christianity, Islam, Hinduism. In any country when religion influences ideologies you get bad people at the helm.

Christians in the US for example have had their faith go through change, many of them accept LGBTQ rights and many of them discard things like misogyny.

Islam hasn't gone through a change like that in France or even in their own countries.

[-]

NovaKaizr@reddit

Literally all of those could have been used to describe christianity, and not even that long ago.

Building churches in other countries? Check. Literally even in countries they don't live, that is what missionaries are

Forcing clothing standards on women, placing limits on how much skin they are allowed to show? Check

Broadcasting calls to prayer in public? Check, that is what church bells are.

Also, you do know there are christian churches in muslims countries right? There are 600 just in Iran. There are no recognized churches in Saudi Arabia, but that only goes to show there is no unified "muslim culture"

Even the covering laws on women that islamophobes love to cite as the symbol of muslim oppression is not shared in all "muslim countries". Face covering is mandatory in Afghanistan and Iran, but completely optional in Egypt and Turkey. Even the Saudi prince has openly called it optional. Other "muslim countries" have implemented a complete or partial ban. Algeria and Tunesia have banned the use of niqab for women working as public officials. Morocco actually has a ban specifically on the afghan burqa.

It is actually quite interesting

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_veiling_practices_by_country

[-]

blackoutduck@reddit

While Jews were treated this way Jews did not go around pulling Charlie Hebdo's when someone didn't like their top guy.

Jews were discriminated against for the sake of discriminating against them.

Forced to work specific jobs and then demonized for it.

Ostracized from society and then told they aren't integrating enough.

Then when integrating were told they were "insert European country here" enough.

[-]

lolacalamidad@reddit

Judaism is completely different mindset.

[-]

OusammaBenLePen@reddit

👏👏

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

Or maybe it just that there isn't an actual threat to be all up in arms against an entire religion just because there are extremists in that religion.

[-]

meatieso@reddit

This report is not about extremists. The Muslim Brotherhood is not an extremist organization: they're not terrorists, nor condone terrorist attacks. Their goal, in any country they're established, is to further their political agenda, islamism. Moderate islamism, but islamism none the less. Their goal is to shape the societies they live in into Islam. Not to adapt Islam into modernity, but to adapt modernity into Islam, and the prevalece of Islam and their values above civil values. And that's the reason why they're persecuted in several Muslim countries, like Egypt, and why Western countries should be aware of their influence.

Not because they are going to bomb trains. But because they will become a political block (and pretty reactionary one in that case) in the near future.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

And I'm fine you are against that. Religion should never become one with the state, no matter what the religion is.

I just hope you hold the same criticism against other religious groups that wish to do the same. Because I see a lot of political groups in Europe that wish to do the same but with christianity, and oh, behold, they haven't stopped rising in popularity these last years.

The fact that one is criticized and the other not is prejudice, and prejudice against Islam has a name.

[-]

meatieso@reddit

Three things: one, what I believe or not about other form of radicalizations doesn't change the topic we're talking about, Muslim Brotherhood.

Two, I could reverse the same question, I see you worried more about ine kind of radicalization than the other and suggest you're "insert whatever name you like". I won't do that, because agains, that's not the topic.

Three, the rise of far right in Europe has little to do with Christian integrism. In that case Spain is an exception because conservatism in Spain is tied to Catholic values. And even is Spain is debatable, because there was a libertarian wing in the party that was purged. But in general, in Europe and partially in Spain, the rise of far right in Europe is not fueled by the defense of Christian traditional values and the prevalence of Christian values above the rule of law. That rise is fueled by inmigration, and oposition to the values those inmigrants bring (like Islam). French far right invoke civil and secular values in oposition to Islamism. And it's not the only far right party claiming that, but the most clear cut case.

Whataboutism and bad faith arguments won't take you far.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

Okay so homophobia, transphobia, misogyny and imposing religious beliefs is only fine if we do it. But if they do it they are evil and want to ruin the west and bringing wrong values, got it.

[-]

meatieso@reddit

I haven't said anything remotely similar to that in that comment, but I guess we could add strawmen arguments to your repertoir. I didn't expect much from the average redditor, but here we are. You are right, I'm wrong, you're good and I'm evil, you win and I lose.

Then don't cry when your side loses again because "people vote wrong". It's you people who don't listen to anybody and focus on "being right".

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

Okay, I'll bite, what are those values inmigranrs bring, I want to know.

[-]

meatieso@reddit

Why, to keep twisting it?

Basically people grow in their culture, get used to it, and that includes religion. Even if people are not religious, people are still influenced by it. I grew up in a Catholic country, and that influences my culture and way of life.

There are certain cultures that mix together better than others, or that bring values that doesn't contradict. For example, people in general don't complain about Eastern Asian inmigration. Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese... those people have their own beliefs, values, and they don't change them when they migrate, yet those values don't contradict fundamentally with our values, and that's why people don't complain about them, even though sometimes they don't integrate that well in our societies.

Christianism and Islam are different religions. They have certain similarities, being Abrahamic religions, but there are certain differencies that makes them incompatible. I won't extend that much, I'll try to summarise it the best I can, just hope you just don't argue in bad faith and asume the worst from my part.

Christianism is based on the teachings of Jesus. Jesus is the central figure. Even though there's a Bible, a holy book, the centre is Jesus, and as such, it's based on interpretation. There aren't many fundamentalist churches in Christianism; obviously there are, but main confessions rely on the interpretation of the Bible (either the Pope, the Patriarchs, their own...) The whole Reformation relies on that fact. Also, Christianism could be considered a "failed" political and miliraty revolution (against the Romans), so it became an spiritual religion, a personal relation with God. That makes it more prone to individualism, and in my opinion why Western societies embraced individualism in recent years, because Christianims "allowed" it.

Islam is a more literal religion. The centre of the religion is not Muhammad, but the Quram itself. The word of God is the true centre, and the Prophet is just "another" prophet, the last one, the last revelation. That makes Islam more easily to interpret literally: 90% of Muslims are Sunni, a school that basically don't interpret the Quram and the Haddiths, is more prone to fundamentalism (Shi'ia Islam is different and as such more similar to Christianity). Also, Islam grew in a different political context: it was born when Muhammad was persecuted, and it became a militant faith in its concept; it developed in a bellicose context, and has a more developed political structure. It demands to fight infidels, because at the time, they did have to fight, and they won. Finnaly, and because of that, they have a more emphasis on community, the Umma, it's a colective effort, a fight to spread the faith.

There are more nuances, values, some positive and some negative: Muslim give a great importance on family, and that's a good value they bring with them compared to ourselves or other inmigrant groups; they bring tcharmil culture (something Moroccans or Algerians also complain), a violent culture that don't want to integrate and refuse and hate Western values... It would be a long discussion, and it doesn't mean "I hate this culture and anybody from that culture". I don't, I like my Moroccan neighbours, I get along with Muslim people pretty good, but that doesn't mean I think it would be a net positive in our country a substantial Muslim population, or the other way around, it wouldn't be positive for them if we moved there.

Samuel Hutchinson I think was the guy, who wrote an article answering to Fukuyama's "the end of History" article, and the guy stated basically that History wasn't over, and the future would be a clash of civilizations, and Western civilization would clash mainly with the Muslim world. I think he wrote it in 1995, and at the beginning I thought the guy was nuts, but in the end, I think he was onto something.

Sorry for the rant, but you "asked" for it. You can keep calling me "you're an Islamophobe", I don't mind. I already proved I do know that culture because I've studied it, and that's why I refuse it, as a culture and ideology, not because I hate its people.

Have a nice day.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

You are not anyone to decide who stays or goes based on your political preferences, none of us can do that.
It's still not an excuse to send millions out of a country, just because something they might believe in might be harmful
Muslims arrive with their culture and religion to countries that vastly outnumber. They will assimillate, sooner or later, but they will. Perhaps they won't abandon their religion or culture in their homes, but they will assimilate, it's just a matter of time. And if not them, their children.

But you can't expect them to do so if the only thing they face are violence and being treated the same as terrorists. In fact if you went to live to a new place and everyone around there shunned you and treated you like a national danger, you would actually get even more pissed.

[-]

meatieso@reddit

Yes, judges do. If an organization is deemed dangerous to the state, the oeganization can be banned.
That's deportation, nobody is talking about deportation. Prioritise inmigrants from other countries and cultures though is something we should strive for.
Reality says different. Sweden, France, Netherlands, Germany, UK... It happens the opposite, the first generation tries to fit in, the 2nd and 3rd generations become more disconnected. It happens as you say with other people from other cultures, they assimilate rather fast. But not with this one, and there's plenty of proof about that. Other inmigrants also suffer discrimination and poverty, yet they don't cause the same uproar among the population.

I wish it would work as you say, but it isn't. We tried as you said for the last 20-30 years, and it hasn't worked out. Maybe it's time to aknowledge the mistakes from the past.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

Judges do, yes, they have to do an actual investigation first.
I'm not even going to answer this. It's just ridiculous.
Yeah, other inmigrants don't cause the same uproar. That might be because politicians won't shut the fuck up about how that Moroccan man that just moved in is actually Bin Laden reincarnated.

Honestly amazing how you seem to know so much but at the same time are completely oblivious, either on purpose or by accident, to how society and politics work.

[-]

Glum_Sentence972@reddit

Yeah, other inmigrants don't cause the same uproar. That might be because politicians won't shut the fuck up about how that Moroccan man that just moved in is actually Bin Laden reincarnated.

US Muslims are more integrated than most of their European counerparts despite the US having a bigger issue with this immediately after 9/11. And the Nordic nations are almost infamous in how much they seek to aid and integrate differing groups into their culture.

So simply saying "stop being mean to them and they will get along fine" makes no sense.

[-]

meatieso@reddit

That might be because politicians won't shut the fuck up about how that Moroccan man that just moved in is actually Bin Laden reincarnated.

That didn't happen before. Sweden is the text example, they had Social Democrats in power for decades, all kinds of subsidies, integration policies... And it didn't work, it's just the reality. After those policies failed, it's when far right started to rise, because traditional parties refuse to admit their mistake. It wasn't the other way around, those Eruoepan countries started to get inmigrants from those Muslim countries years before the far right became something more than a few nutjobs with swastikas in the bedrooms.

Honestly amazing how you seem to know so much but at the same time are completely oblivious, either on purpose or by accident, to how society and politics work.

Doesn't that ring any bell for you? Because I know them, I've spoken to them, and most of the time I get along with them. I was like you, until I went out and spoke to them. Your perspective is very patronising and disrispectful: they have their own thoughts, values, opinions, and they don't need people like you defending them without knowing them. They are people, not political tokens.

Do you know why I get along with them? Because I am a man, and a conservative one, like them. They don't like you nor respect you. They see European women as cheap, because you can fuck them without marrying them or having to pay a dowry, they show skin to everybody, so you are tramps for them. A Moroccan explained that to me. Marriage is very important in their society (as it should be). They see Europe as a rich place to "plunder", with cheap women and weak men that won't defend them. Has nothing to do with how we think of them, they have their own thought, values, because they're people.

When I was working in the Red Cross, there was an Algerian man who everybody said "that's a mean son of a bitch", yet he was very friendly and respectful with me, even though he was problematic for the other (female) workers. Because I was a man, he saw me as an equal, and because I didn't force him to speak Spanish but English or French instead. He respected me.

Teachers friends of mine, they don't have problems with African students, because they are guys. The teachers friends of mine who are women do have problems, because they don't respect them. They don't respect you. That's what you don't understand and reality tought me.

You may think "that's what feminism is for, we will win their minds in the future", but you haven't won our minds yet. You have called out every misdeed European men have done in the past century, and the struggle is not won, even worse, younger generations are turning more and more conservative. And you aren't afraid to fight us. What makes you think you will win that battle against people who are even more consevative and you are afraid of calling them out?

I'm not worried for myself. Again, I get along with them, we share similar values, Moroccan families are pretty good neighbours all things considered... But my wife is worried, and I don't want to live in a place where she needs to go out with me in order to be safe.

Reality tought me that. They tought me that. Again, I don't hate the individual, I hate the culture. I don't hate the sinner, I hate the sin. Islam as a religion hasn't backed off peacefully from nowhere, and I already pay enough taxes, I don't want to pay the jizya on top of that.

This last paragraph is hyperbolic and half a joke to be honest, but I hope I made my point clear, and made you change your opinion. Not on your beliefs, that's your own and I doubt anybody can change them. Your opinion on us, on me. Next time you think about a "facha" as a bunch of hateful, spineless stupid people, think "well, some of them can put two sentences together without shitting themselves, maybe there's a reason why they're like that" instead of the usual moral condescendingly attitude I usually see among my fellow "podemitas".

Have a nice Sunday, lady.

[-]

Xion-raseri@reddit

How can you not take other religions etc into account when the topic is prejudice? Prejudice by definition has to take other things into account, as it’s about comparisons.

If you’re discussing if there’s prejudice against trait A, you also have to look at how B and C are treated. Otherwise you could make some very ridiculous claims:

“Everyone with trait A was fired, this is prejudice against trait A people!”

Islamism is extreme. They are trying to influence countries that don’t share their values

[-]

9_Taurus@reddit

Lol, you haven't been there recently, I imagine? There's literally not a single city left untouched by the scourge of insecurity—they're stacked in neighborhoods, in blocks, creating literal no-go zones for citizens and public services (police, firefighters, etc.). Their offspring spread chaos everywhere; they're uneducated and have no connection to the country they were born in. You're no longer safe anywhere in the cities. And it's not like France hasn't been the hardest hit by terrorist attacks. This religion is fundamentally incompatible with the West—enough with the moralizing, do-gooder speeches at some point. I have no pity for the French who keep repeating the same political cycle for two decades, but you can't take away their right to hate this religion.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

And they also eat the babies, don't forget about that.

Whataboutism... There is a big difference between something that happened in the past and was reformed to something that is part of present cultures I went in high school with people who were part of that culture and religion and they told me they would disown their child if they turned out gay I never heard a Christian say that granted the big difference is also 99% of the Christians I know don't care about their religion and are just Christian on paper which honestly is a good thing

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

YOU NEVER HEARD A CHRISTIAN SAY THEY WOULD DISOWN THEIR CHILD IF THEY WERE GAY??

I want to go to you magical lollipop land dude.

Also everything you just said is completely just anecdotes. In every single predomintantly christian country there is at least one christian organisation that strongly believes that gay people are spawns of Satan. Some countries even go as far as to not accept gay marriage due to the old christian belief that being gay is evil.

[-]

True-Pin-925@reddit

Sorry I don't live in a third world country so no.

In every single predomintantly christian country there is at least one christian organisation that strongly believes that gay people are spawns of Satan. Some countries even go as far as to not accept gay marriage due to the old christian belief that being gay is evil.

There are currently 38 countries where same-sex marriage is legal and the majority of them are to most part Christian in contrast the majority of countries where its a crime a Islamic so please just stop being delusional

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_rights_by_country_or_territory#/media/File:World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression.svg

I think it should be fairly telling that allmost all of the orange and red countries in the map are in Africa and the middle east.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

You don't live in a third world country, you live in a fantasy world.

All social progress because people fought AGAINST the christian governments that heavily opposed said progress. Some European and Christian countries have been starting to roll back on said rights. Examples: Italy has started to revoke the right for lesbian mothers to adopt children, or Hungary and Orban gov has put his aim at trans people first and Poland banned pride. In the US, another heavily christian country, the current president has started basically a legal war that has started with revoking trans people of their rights and now they are talking about revoking gay marriage. Again, a government that strongly believes in Christian traditional values.

But here you are, acting like if Islamists are the most evil people in the world for the actions of the extreme branches of said group, when the religion you try to defend is exactly the same bs.

[-]

Glum_Sentence972@reddit

The fact that the Christians didn't resort to vicious civil war and terrorist bombings kinda point to Christians calming down significantly. Your logic makes zero sense in your defense of another religion when using Christianity as a comparison; it instead just kinda highlights how comparatively liberal the Christians are.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

Yeah, you are right, they only resorted to Police brutality and Chemical castrating, apart from raids to known lgbt safe spaces and expulsion of lgbt people from societies apart from the psychological torture in conversion "therapy". If it was for those Christians gay people would be treated exactly the same or even worse.

[-]

No, no. You are the one who might as well say that unless someone forces themselves into another person it's not SA. But innapropiate touch is also SA, anything done to a person without consent in a sexual manner is SA.

Saying that lesbian mothers cannot adopt is targeting lesbians and putting them at risk and shunning them from society making them more probable to suffer from depression or similar therefore making their suicide a very possible and real thing, making trans people unable to transition is just killing them you are banning them from existence, guess how that ends. Making gay marriage illegal is also shunning them from society, making a clear message that if you are gay you are not normal.

Do you believe torture is better than death? I think both suck, both should never be done. It doesn't matter if you promise to me that torture hurts less, it should not be done, and I will condemn both without mercy.

[-]

True-Pin-925@reddit

All social progress because people fought AGAINST the christian governments that heavily opposed said progress. Some European and Christian countries have been starting to roll back on said rights.

There is no Christian government religion and the state is separated in all of western countries and what happened 200 years ago doesn't matter since once again we don't live 200 years ago we live now. Western societies most of them with a Christian majority created and protect human rights can't say the same thing about countries with Muslim majority. Try organizing a Pride parade in Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Afghanistan and see what happens. You literally live in a bubble and it's sad.

Examples: Italy has started to revoke the right for lesbian mothers to adopt children, or Hungary and Orban gov has put his aim at trans people first and Poland banned pride. In the US, another heavily christian country, the current president has started basically a legal war that has started with revoking trans people of their rights and now they are talking about revoking gay marriage. Again, a government that strongly believes in Christian traditional values.

Cool story they still have a secular constitution so nothing to do with religion also equating not being able to have some events or adopt to literally getting prosecuted and killed in the middle east is certainly a take... Once again shows that you live in a bubble typical redditor...

But here you are, acting like if Islamists are the most evil people in the world for the actions of the extreme branches of said group, when the religion you try to defend is exactly the same bs.

That's like saying theft and homicide is the same because they are both crimes... If you can't acknowledge one is significantly worse and poser a bigger danger to society than we have a problem. Equating a religion where most people don't care and at most say mean things based on your sexuality to a religion where you possible get imprisoned killed or worse is literally downplaying the dangers...

Btw it's kinda funny how you use the term "islamists" I guess it really shows your lack of knowledge so lets show you the definition of that word to highlight what values you are actually defending.

Islamists refers to individuals or groups who advocate for a political system that is based on Islamic principles and laws (Sharia). It generally implies a belief that Islam should play a central role not just in personal life but also in government and public affairs.

Islamism has been defined as:
"a political ideology which seeks to enforce Islamic precepts and norms as generally applicable rules for people's conduct; and whose adherents seek a state based on Islamic values and laws (sharia) and rejecting Western guiding principles, such as freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, artistic freedom and freedom of religion"

Odd that you would defend such things someone doesn't seem to like democracy I see.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

The fact that you are unable to see how the rollback in rights on the US and European countries is harmful to the lgbt community already speaks louder than whatever bs you are stating.

You don't care about freedom, safety or whatever. You just want to win.

[-]

farfromhome666@reddit

This post is about Islamism not Islam.

[-]

mylaptopredditVC@reddit

It is representative of islamic extremists, which the muslim brotherhood is a part of. Normal muslims dont go around and do stuff like that

[-]

Leather_Insect5900@reddit

NoxZeal@reddit

Poverty can cause psychological issues that make people commit crimes, that shouldn't be a really hot take. I don't know about a specific case where someone who drove into a christmas market is from a poor background but these people that do such things are generally accepted as crazies. To claim that Islam would command such a thing is sheer conspiracy (as is promoted by far right nutjobs), causes blanket discrimination suspicion upon Muslims and it would technically mean that every single Muslim out there doesn't practice their religion properly and the ones that are doing these crimes are doing it right.

[-]

Advanced_Scratch2868@reddit

Is there poor Christians and poor Budhist driving a car into muslim fedtivals/markets? And judging how there are a lot more of Christians in the country, therefore a lot of them poor, there should be statisticaly a lot more of poor Christians who drive into muslim markets, right?

[-]

Fit_Treacle_6077@reddit

Oh man.

You haven’t really kept up with world events have you?

You know the famous Buddhist country of Myanmar commits both ethnic and religious violence right? With one of the crimes being genocide.

Did you also forget Thailand occupies Malay ethnic land and has been involved in some level of ethnic cleansing but only pushed back hard by the Malay - Indo states?

Let’s also not forget the time the Philippines had a radical Christian nationalist who decided to killing some ethnic Muslim group can causing a civil war when trying to invade Malaysia was a good idea thus causing decades of terror from both sides.

The famous Hindu state of India has backed state ethnic cleansing on Christian, Muslim and Sikh population leading to separatism and violence with Hindu radicals committing mass atrocities.

Let’s also not forget the terror state known as Israel.

However let’s also take it a further did we forget about the White Supermacist who shot up a mosque in New Zealand, and the one that did it Canada, and the stabbing that occurred in France.

Let’s not forget the numerous hate crimes and violent crimes by almost every group on earth to another but in Europe predominantly to Muslim, Jews, Asians and Africans in general.

[-]

Advanced_Scratch2868@reddit

Thank you for such a homework. My appologies for not being specific enough. My comment was for western countries that are majorly Christian (because that is what the topic was about so I did not felt the need to specify). My question then would be why is there no bunch of poor Christians who shoot up the muslim markets, in the western countries?

[-]

Fit_Treacle_6077@reddit

I believe this is due to the Muslim population being smaller and more disassociated in the past to be directly aimed as target.

For example, if you think about most inspired attack events against civilians in the west they often motivated in most cases due to European interventionism which results in killings abroad.

The average European citizen until more recently aside from more nationalist groups or nations didn’t particular view the Islamic world as a whole.

Eg: the Anglo most likely due to their colonialism was able to distinguish Muslims by regional and national differences in which Islam as a religion was also extremely diverse.

If you notice most attackers also come from nations that often were affected by modern imperialism, colonialism or interventionism.

I am not arguing it is morally correct, I am arguing the mindset of people who attack and their reasoning even if it is bad.

More local grown populations who grew up in discrimination often also radicalise which privileged,uneducated or propagandised group also can commit violence (eg: radical white young men which has been a growing issue).

We seen this during the Serbian ethnic cleaning campaigns against the Bosnians.

We also see a lot of violence against minorities and why they choose not to use vehicles could be a just be the connivence or targeted way of what they wanted to do.

Terror groups want to maximise causalities regardless of religion as a reputational gain. They groups or individuals like Brenton (New Zealand shooter) was motivated by targeted killings of a group.

This is also seen in white nationalist who want to avoid killing whites:

2022 Buffalo shooting

Most crimes committed by Europeans tend to be outside of Europe which is why they might be a confusion to why Europeans feel they are being targeted.

For example: The Afghanistan killing fields event that was perpetrated by young white men often Christian from Australia:

(Detailed new report from ABC if you wish to watch the full segment):

https://youtu.be/-GPplTKCYpQ?si=b56uzoRimwRqBu3T

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brereton_Report

Now imagine someone who grew up in a non western country who often see these crimes occurring due to their media focus on it, grew up experiencing these crimes or grew up with families experiencing these crimes.

They get radicalised and commit mass atrocities.

Let’s also argue poor people and committing crime.

If you are indigenous to the land you already at an advantage due to cultural dominance and less societal discrimination. This also applies to religious majorities,

In which some foreign groups benefited from European colonialism due to segregation, ethnic cleaning or genocide.

While divisionism can play a rule in ethnic conflicts eg: Africa often stemming from colonialism

You also have poverty which can lead to massive levels of crime as seen all over the world and can lead to massive levels of failed integration eg:

Sweden failures to provide job programs and non ghettofication to refugees which lead to crime rates increasing this failure.

The 1st comment claims Islam is incompatible with western culture (claim: Islam is incompatible with western culture)

The 2nd comment mentions that there are majority Muslim countries in the EU already (rebuttal: Islam is already compatible with western culture)

3rd comment asks which countries those are (disbelief? Idk)

4th comment (you) list out the majority Muslim countries (proof)

5th comment replies with a clear example of the inability to incorporate into western culture (claim: 3 different governments in a single country is not compatibility)

In my mind everything tracks as on-topic, but feel free to point out where I went off the rails

[-]

farfromhome666@reddit

There are no Muslim majority countries in the EU.

[-]

nothingpersonnelmate@reddit

None of those countries are in the EU.

[-]

_El_Bokononista_@reddit

You do realise there's Muslim majority countries in Europe and the EU, right?

doesn't mean they're all bad either

[-]

TheRealMudi@reddit

Leave it to Americans to spew some random bullshit lmao

[-]

Cheesen_One@reddit

Islamophobes:

Islamists:

Gatekeeping what a true muslim is.

[-]

SuperUranus@reddit

Ironically, the things you are saying aren’t compatible with western values either.

[-]

PiedBolvine@reddit

This was a whole plot point in Camp of the Saints

[-]

Statement_I_am_HK-47@reddit

Here in America, we had, and still have, people who say this exact thing about black and hispanic people, swearing up and down that connecting it to poverty is bleeding heart leftism.

The narrative is that because Islamists exist, there is an actual risk that France might get overtaken by Islamism, when in reality, this is just a diversion from the far-right takeover that is a much more realistic threat, given that they already have a couple of ministers and a whole slew of seats in parliament.

[-]

soggycow2790@reddit

That is not what the report is arguing.

the report's authors said that "no recent document demonstrates the desire of Muslims in France to establish an Islamic state in France or to enforce Sharia law there."

[-]

Bravemount@reddit

And yet the report argues that there is a subversive project aiming to threaten gender equality and secularism.

I think you'd be surprised just how many people would agree with Islamist rhetoric in France. The goal seems to be to normalize those beliefs, not garner people to a political cause like the far-right.

[-]

Bravemount@reddit

Well, if you consider the overlap between far right ideology and islamism, especially about gender equality, sexual minorities, etc. yeah, you'll find plenty of people who agree with some islamist rhetoric.

But the far right has achieved everything the islamists have achieved and then much more on top, so I don't see how you can possibly believe them to be of similar influence.

[-]

soggycow2790@reddit

Yes, I agree in part. I also think, however, that a large part (perhaps even the largest part) of the far-right’s growth in recent decades is due not solely to their ideological positions on these subjects, but also because people have grown weary of the current system. Most people tend to vote for extremists when they feel things aren’t working out under traditional parties, not necessarily because they agree with their ideology.

This is the biggest and most glaring difference to me and what makes Islamism, in my opinion, similarly dangerous. Because Islamism relies solely on deep religious belief and ideology in the West, not political frustration. Becoming an Islamist or subscribing to Islamist rhetoric is not a protest vote, it is a conviction.

[-]

Bravemount@reddit

The main factor behind the growth of the far right is a divide and conquer strategy used against the poor in class warfare, orchestrated through billionaire owned media and social networks. Russia is also pushing hard on this as it fractures the West. I suspect billionaires to work hand in hand with Russia because they like the oligarchic system they have, so their interests align.

Establishment parties are trying to maintain the neoliberal status quo that causes the popular frustration you mentioned because of financial interests and/or ideological blindness, thus adding to the growth of the far right instead of fighting it, thus being useful idiots. A look at the 1930s shows how this will end for them and us all.

The lack of perspectives and sense of belonging this causes, especially in young people, works just as well to push young Muslims into the arms of islamists as it works for pushing other young people to the far right.

Still, the people in power deploy more energy to fight the left, which has actual, proven to work solutions to societal issues because they are more scared of the wealthy having to pay taxes than they are of the rise of fascism.

Imagine you're so stupid that you think that if you're French and white you can't be tired of all the Islamophobic assholes who are just trying to make us hâte people, the people I grew up with, lived with and work with today. Fuck your

[-]

OptimisticRealist__@reddit

France is going through the biggest wave of Islamophobia in years.

You say the far right is the real threat

How many far right beheadings have there been in France?

Why on earth would a secular democracy give political representation to islamists? If that's important to them, they can emigrate to one of the 30 islamist theocracies in the world

[-]

Maximum-Hall-5614@reddit

How difficult is it to realize the religious fanaticism is a conservative ideological belief, regardless of religion?

Religious terrorism, regardless of the religion or indeed the colour of their skin, is inherently right wing terrorism. You will struggle to find any religious fundamentalist who espoused leftist ideological beliefs.

Terrorism carried out in the name of Allah is right wing terror, the same as terrorism carried out in the name of the white race.

Neither act of terror justifies demonizing that entire group.

Imagine if we treated all white people the way we (should) treat white supremacists? Suggesting that all white people fundamentally believe in violent, repressive societal change in alignment with Christian fundamentalists? Cite the most violent passage of the Christian Bible?

More people have been murdered in the name of “Western values” than every other ideological murder combined.

[-]

KaleidoscopeOrnery39@reddit

How many beheadings by Catholics have there been in the last five years?

How many people have been killed for insulting Jesus?

Many countries prescribe death as the punishment for insulting Islam

Islamism is inherently violent and anti democratic

It's totally fine to have Muslims in Europe but the idea of tolerating political Islam is abhorrent

[-]

Maximum-Hall-5614@reddit

For starters, there’s the million Iraqi civilians slaughtered in the 21st century in the name of “defending the West” after a terrorist attack was carried out by a man funded by the US government (“one nation under [the Christian] God”) with the prior knowledge of the US government.

The hundreds of thousands of Palestinians slaughtered in the name of “defending the West” over the decades

The millions of people who have suffered at the hands of the Catholic Church as an institution is too high to count. Sure, maybe not many beheadings, but certainly an immeasurable amount of child sex abuse. I guess all Catholics are predisposed to pedophilia, by your logic.

[-]

KaleidoscopeOrnery39@reddit

Does the Catholic Church condemn child abuse?

Many Islamist countries still kill people for apostasy

world’s worst humanitarian crisis for women and girls definitely does not mean most violent war in the world and worst humanitarian crisis and definitely not in history

[-]

hasdunk@reddit

I like how people like you trying to argue otherwise cannot read that they're not talking about muslims in general? The comment above you is talking about "Islamism", which is not a believe that's held by all muslims. The article is also talking about muslim brotherhood, which again, not all muslims associate with.

Netsuko@reddit

Also Islam is NOT a race. So stop pulling the racist card when it makes no sense.

[-]

loggy_sci@reddit

Something tells me you don’t have an issue with white European Muslims.

[-]

Netsuko@reddit

I have no issue with people who respect western values and the values of the country they live in. If you demand a caliphate, if you disrespect the rights of women, trans and queer people, if you want sharia to be the law then sorry, you do not belong here. I don’t ask anyone to abandon their faith but if you come to a country, you adapt to the country, you do not demand that the country adapts to you.

[-]

Maximum-Hall-5614@reddit

What exactly makes non-Western values inferior to Western values?

Why is “the West” comprised almost entirely of white-majority countries?

Is there a link between these two?

[-]

Netsuko@reddit

"Why is “the West” comprised almost entirely of white-majority countries?"

Uuuh.. you know... geography?

"What exactly makes non-Western values inferior to Western values?"

I may have expressed myself wrong. I said "people who respect western values and the values of the country they live in." Because I am from a western country and thus, have western values. A country like Japan obviously isn't western but still has good societal values.

But as example, and I am talking about islamic countries here: The prosecution of homosexuals and people of other faiths, the severely restricted or non-existent rights of women, child marriage, sharia law in general.

I understand that of course, not EVERY muslim-majority country has the same amount of the things I just listed, but especially in arabic countries, many of these things exist. Women's rights literally do not exist in Afghanistan. Same in Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen.

Now, what nationalities do we get as refugees here in Europe? Syria and Afghanistan are two of the big ones. And it's overwhelmingly young men. No women and children.

You don't go to Iraq, to Syria or to Afghanistan and demand a christan church, food that aligns with your faith, christian holidays, you don't demand that your language and religion is taught in schools.

Yet ALL these things are provided here in Europe, some more than others depending on the country. We have mosques, we have halal food, we have classes in school that teach the quran and that teach arabic and other languages. It makes it harder and harder for people and their kids to integrate into this society because they have no desire to integrate. They want THEIR values, THEIR values and THEIR laws to be the defining features.

People get radicalized by islamistic figures inside the mosques that were built for them.
Islamic values and world views are not compatible with the western world.

This is NOT about saying "people from islamic countries are lesser" But I AM saying that I am seriously concerned about the kind of values and world views many of these countries have and that those who come here are trying to impose those views and values on us.

But I am also not allowed to say "I am concerned about my country" because apparently that is enough to be labeled a right win nut, which is also just another tactic to silence people.

[-]

centaur_unicorn23@reddit

Europeans are hilarious when they talk about values and what’s right and what’s wrong. This is expected. It’s in your history, and a large part human history. Divide and conquer, village to village, country to country. We never learn to coexist with the ‘other’. Ultimately this fear we have for a group different than us is probably a defense or learned thing from early man. Now we have that feeling still and it must truly torment us but don’t really know why, so we use any reason we need to in order to justify our violent actions. France and any European country will change, without asking for permission sooner than later. We’re so naive to think we have any say in this. 300 years ago we were peasants and now we want to stop the river current from flowing because we believe our short history on this particular soil belongs to us and we’re in charge if the values that rest upon its land. It’s a bit nonsensical, especially when it inevitably leads to war and death. I live in Canada where we are striving towards multiculturalism. We’re not perfect but we have progressed. We depend on our citizens and immigrants and we believe in respecting their cultures and values. I agree that there can be and does, create conflicts if left unguided. I believe in order to have 2 or multiple cultures exist together, a government has to be proactive in education on both sides. If France has new muslims the government should provide (friendly welcoming) training and education on values and customs, and the government should educate their citizens with western values on other cultures and values. I’ve met too many racist Europeans (and racists in general) that lack education and are fueling their fears on wives tales and lies. It’s one or the other. Peace or war and I choose peace which means we have to do the hard thing and learn to play nice in the sandbox together. The easy road is to go to war and expel the ‘other’. Problem with that is we are all the other.

[-]

Glum_Sentence972@reddit

I mean, all things change. But those changes, at least from a modern standpoint, can be a bad one. Maybe this era where women's rights are a thing will be seen as a mistake in the future. Will you celebrate that change as natural? Maybe. But maybe there are changes that shouldn't happen for the sake of future generations.

[-]

MCRN-Tachi158@reddit

Western values: equality, freedom of religion, and speech, human rights, scientific and academic inquiry, etc.

Non-western Values: none of those, heavy reliance on faith and authority.

I think the solution to underrepresentation is lifting up muslims from poverty and preventing ghettoisation.

Naturally, once muslims become mostly middle class, they'll participate in politics more.

Also, I think underrepresentation in this context refers to an underrepresentation in parliament, not a lack of representation of their interests necessarily.

[-]

Raccoons-for-all@reddit

Yep, total fake news from you. The mean of counting Muslims in France is registered attendees of mosques. The real number is much higher (2-3x order)

[-]

Maj0r-DeCoverley@reddit

I'm french, I'm a leftist (not from the PS), and I think you may be naive here.

Yes there is a wave of far-right in this country. But there is also a real issue with the Frères Musulmans, it's been going for years now, they receive money from foreign powers with a certain agenda. Don't let universalism blind you to the fact those morons are a threat, in the same way the evangelists are a similar threat.

[-]

because low birth rates aren't a result of immigration

nobody is claiming that though. mass immigration (from culturally foreign societies) is a response to low birth rate, against the will of the host population. that is the nutshell of the replacement argument.

[-]

nothingpersonnelmate@reddit

It's still flawed in the sense that people aren't being replaced, they're choosing not to have children and then also other people are immigrating. There's no active effort to reduce the size of one group and increase the size of another in its place, which would be the literal form of replacement in this context.

[-]

Phiggle@reddit

I agree with you. As with many driving factors in today's political discourse, the more high-resolution the ideas are observed, the less black and white they become.

My gripe was that I didn't argue for or against this theory. I simply stated that, in my view, many people see and use this theory to make decisions, which could be one of the factors driving politics at the moment.

Grumblepugs2000@reddit

And not for the better. They will look like Lebanon in 50 years

[-]

marcusaurelius_phd@reddit

They're 80% of our high security prisoners.

[-]

Bibliloo@reddit

You're right the gauls have nearly disappeared since the Roman and Frankish conquest in the 1st century.

[-]

Grumblepugs2000@reddit

The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization. They led the revolution in during the Arab Spring in Egypt and we are lucky they were incompetent enough to get kicked out in less than year

[-]

Designer_Wear_4074@reddit

It’s insane how much discrimination Muslims Face on a daily basis

Islam is sexist and homophobic. Tolerating it is encouraging sexism, homophobia and terrorism.

[-]

AFuckingDuck_69@reddit

This has nothing to do with the conversation

[-]

SignificantAd1421@reddit

I mean the hijab is a symbol of oppression it is forced by men on women.

That is textbook oppression

[-]

Imaginary-Chain5714@reddit

Lots of women wear the hijab willingly. Of course I’m against women wearing it out of pressure from their family(as am I with other religious veils), to characterize the hijab as textbook oppression is very dumb

[-]

It was about 10 in 2023. From 6.8 to 9 million in 2 years.

Désolé d’être Charlie mec.

[-]

Yeah… well I’m french too and I really don’t know what you’re talking about.

France has been fighting muslim brotherhood pretty actively since the 90’s and the Algerian civil war.

The main issue is that they were protected by US and UK.

I think it’s dangerous to suggest that Muslims are more prone to violence than other religious groups.

Most religious violence throughout the Middle Ages was overwhelmingly Christian-based. I don’t want to be labelled anti-Semitic but the abhorrent violence and illegal annexation we are seeing in Gaza and the West Bank are dangerously justified by Israel under the guise of Judaism. Let’s also not forget how the Hindutva movement is killing Muslim people in India in broad daylight.

We are currently in a phase, sure, where Islamic extremist violence is much more salient post 9/11. But there is also an inherent media bias to misreport any crimes committed by a Muslim as religious terrorism even if it isn’t. And a lot of Muslim exteemist groups that exist today (e.g. the Taliban, the RSF in Sudan) only do so due to outside influence.

[-]

Glum_Sentence972@reddit

I think it’s dangerous to suggest that Muslims are more prone to violence than other religious groups.

Objectively speaking, radical Muslims make up the vast vast majority of terrorist activity across the planet. Mostly within the Middle East, actually. This isn't biased.

Also, to claim that the majority of violence in the Middle Ages was Christian-based is massively Eurocentric. Christians did nothing across the world. And Muslims were the "majority" of violence in the Middle East. In fact, since Islam's inception, it has done nothing except expand and conquer Christian lands until the reversal when Christian nations grew powerful enough to bully them in return.

It wasn't like Christians went to Mecca and replaced it with a Cathedral, unlike Muslims in the case of many Churches, and especially in Alexandria, Syria, Jerusalem, and Constantinople.

[-]

Do...you want me to reiterate the statement you made?

Anyway. A lot of these things began before. But the fact is they continued them or expanded them. And are you really trying to act like slavery, one of the greatest evils in human history, was somehow better in Muslim societies than their Western counterparts? You realize one of the biggest slave revolts in human history occurred there, right?

Like, nuance doesn't exist for slavery.

[-]

TheyCallmeProphet08@reddit

Most religious violence throughout the Middle Ages was overwhelmingly Christian-based.

Yes and I'm glad it's over.

I don’t want to be labelled anti-Semitic but the abhorrent violence and illegal annexation we are seeing in Gaza and the West Bank are dangerously justified by Israel under the guise of Judaism. Let’s also not forget how the Hindutva movement is killing Muslim people in India in broad daylight.

Yeah I also get that, ethnonationalists are bad. But I still don't get why we're getting attacked even though we don't have those kinds of radical movements, and as I've already mentioned, we've given them concessions from their demands way before 9/11 shone a spotlight on religious radicalism.

And a lot of Muslim extremist groups that exist today (e.g. the Taliban, the RSF in Sudan) only do so due to outside influence.

Yes, funded by western and gulf states. Any movement can be radicalized if they're cultivated and funded enough. E.g. South Vietnam was led by a US funded Christian radical that killed Buddhists and suspected Communists, in Myanmar, Buddhist extremists are also killing Rohingya Muslims. They're bad but they tend to be isolated cases unlike Islamic radicals who are a much more global phenomenon and dont just affect Europe or the Middle East.

[-]

Juice-De-Pomme@reddit

Retailleux is one of the more disgustingly islamophobic ministers we've had in decades.

This guy just went to an event and rambled for minutes about veiled women in sports. Saying they should be banned for wearing a scarf on their heads.

You are right. I prefer none getting in my life.

And right now the only ones who have actually managed to leverage the countries laws to get in the lifes of people in Europe and America are the Christians.

Should we go raid the Vatican city?

[-]

DharmaPolice@reddit

Yes?

[-]

hiphipbrilliantaj@reddit

Not suggesting that at all, thats how you have deciced to interpret it. Can't speak to many of those religions but Christianity obviously has a massive problem with both of those things, difference is I've never heard the term christianophobia, only ever islamophobia.

We can freely criticise the faults and barbarism of Christianity but the same can not be said about islam without being labelled islamophobic.

As a bisexual I obviously despice all abrahamic religion though there is only one that I feel inherently unsafe around and I assure you I'm not the only memeber of the community who feels this way.

[-]

AstridWarHal@reddit

It might be because that critic of faults and barbarism of islam always comes with a bunch og thinly veiled racism.

The fact that you feel inherently unsafe around one and not the other just shows that this is not for the freedom of minorities, this is because you have a bias.

I have been born under a christian family, raised in a catholic school. I have known muslims and christians alike.

Extremists from both sides suck, both should be booted out of positions of power and the people should know about what they do. And both have caring people that only wish the best for everyone.

I would never go against christians, as a whole, because I know that the extremes do not represent the whole. But you seem very focused about going against all muslims. That is Islamophobia.

[-]

Juice-De-Pomme@reddit

Nope islamophobia is used to designate hatred of muslims. Although etymologicaly it may sound like it means fear of the religion, it is only used like this to legitimize people that hate muslims.

Language is made of usage, when i say retailleux is islamophobe i mean he hates muslim people. Because he does.

[-]

Bwri017@reddit

Quietly fuck off man. The religion of Islam is fundamentally incompatible with western values. Free expression, equal rights, legal protection from cruel and unusual punishment. just look up Islamic jurisprudence. Which isn't just something contained with scripture, it's part of the legal framework for several countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, etc.).

[-]

Juice-De-Pomme@reddit

Dumbass, i am muslim and actually know some islamic laws. As if christianity was compatible with western values? Have you heard of sodom and gomore?

I'll tell you something you've probably never heard, because you see islam through the scope of media you have access to. In islam converting someone by force is prohibited, and a sin. Killing without trial by judges appointed by a sultan, is a sin. Telling anyone how to behave so long as they're not muslim is prohibited. Thinking mulsims in europe want to install muslim laws is delusional and wrong.

[-]

Bwri017@reddit

The difference is that Christianity went through a period called the enlightenment. They collectively agreed that some of the stuff in scripture was plain lunacy. The same thing cant be said for Islam. Name me a modern western democracy that isn't secular. Even Israel is a secular government. The same cant be said for many countries where Islam dominates.

I'll tell you something you've probably never heard, because you see islam through the scope of media you have access to. In islam converting someone by force is prohibited, and a sin. Killing without trial by judges appointed by a sultan, is a sin. Telling anyone how to behave so long as they're not muslim is prohibited. Thinking mulsims in europe want to install muslim laws is delusional and wrong.

Even if Islamic courts operated with complete transparency and were entirely free of corruption, many of the prescribed rulings and punishments would still be considered by modern standards to be excessively harsh and inhumane. For example, amputating the hand of a thief, executing someone for blasphemy, or stoning a woman to death for adultery are practices that raise serious human rights concerns. Such punishments, while rooted in traditional interpretations, are not merely theoretical—they have been carried out in recent times, as evidenced by several high-profile cases in countries like Pakistan.

[-]

Juice-De-Pomme@reddit

Islamic courts

In what context do you think muslim courts operate? European countries?

What is at stake here? Western values in western countries, or western values in all countries? Do you even understand the fact that western values may not be everyone on earth's values?

amputating, executing, stoning

Once again, not carried out by muslims in western countries. But even then, you are looking at it at face value. In western countries religious sins are sometimes crimes but not always, and law is a lot more leniant nowadays than 100s of years ago. But in a muslim country, where there is a sultan (which there hasn't been since the fall of the ottoman empire) this is normal. People are taught that sinning is a crime. Countries have different ways of dealing with crime, in the US, death penalty still exists, so is the problem where we draw the line in the sand?

By the way, cherry picking, not all thieves have their hands cutoff, why? Because in a muslim country where a muslim law is to be applied, there shouldn't be homeless / poor people. So there would be no need for stealing.

You're gona tell me it's utopic and irrealistic, but that is the basis of the law. Applying it in a country where there is no sultan, no judges, is not normal for muslims.

every country is secular except muslim

The problem with your analogy is that Islam is not indigenous to France. These Muslims haven’t been second class citizens for most of history either

Surely Zionism will save us from this existential threat.

[-]

EdHake@reddit

Don’t think France taking a shot at muslim brotherhood, which are behind a lot of terrorist attacks and beheading of teachers… means France défends Israël.

Right now France is pushing for the recognition of Gaza and the two state solution for the Israël/Palestin issue… this is very very far from what Nethanyahoo hopes to achieve.

Also would be very surprised if France lets Israël invade Lebanon like they plan to do it.

[-]

zanotam@reddit

France... Who is doing nothing after their ambassador was fucking fired at by the IDF? That France?

[-]

Lopsided-Garlic-5202@reddit

Well, I mean, some news outlets did say that the delegation went stray away from their designated path. I don't know if it's true or not, but i'd reckon they're not stupid enough to fire at a diplomatic delegation on purpose. You'd expect the responsible person or people that were guiding the diplomats to stick to the plan and take care of their safety, unless it was all done on purpose.

So I don't really know what would you except to happen from any state who's delegate was shot at to do other than vent a bit of their anger the Israeli ambassadors

[-]

Master_Income_8991@reddit

Yeah I'm just making fun of the (likely Zionist) fear porn.

[-]

BabylonianWeeb@reddit

Israel are weaponzing refugees against Europem

[-]

Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit

Israel is weaponzing refugees against Europe

Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit

soggycow2790@reddit

[-]

hirmooge@reddit

When news is slow bring up Islam

[-]

empleadoEstatalBot@reddit

French report warns of spread of Muslim Brotherhood ideology

France

Religion

According to a confidential government report, the Muslim Brotherhood poses a long-term threat to France's national cohesion – not through violence, but by gradually eroding secular values at the local level.
   [France's Minister of the Interior Bruno Retailleau delivers a press conference during a visit to the Pissevin neighborhood in Nimes, southeastern France, on May 16, 2025.](https://img.lemde.fr/2025/05/16/0/0/4253/2835/664/0/75/0/28a3535_ftp-import-images-1-ucco052x5hcw-5919827-01-06.jpg)  France's Minister of the Interior Bruno Retailleau delivers a press conference during a visit to the Pissevin neighborhood in Nimes, southeastern France, on May 16, 2025. SYLVAIN THOMAS / AFP  The Muslim Brotherhood movement is a "threat to national cohesion" in France and action must be taken to stop the spread of "political Islamism," according to a report to be presented to President Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday, May 21. "The reality of this threat, even if it is long term and does not involve violent action, poses a risk of damage to the fabric of society and republican institutions (...) and, more broadly, to national cohesion," said the report, a copy of which was obtained by Agence France-Presse (AFP) on Tuesday. The report, prepared by two senior civil servants, is to be examined by the Defense Council on Wednesday.
France and Germany have the biggest Muslim populations among European Union countries. The report pointed to the spread of Islamism "from the bottom up" and at the municipal level, adding that the phenomenon constituted "a threat in the short to medium term." In France, the movement is "based on a solid structure, but political Islamism is spreading primarily at the local level," the authors stressed. "Resolute and long-term action on the ground seems necessary to stem the rise of political Islamism," they said.

The report highlighted the "subversive nature of the project," saying it aims "to gradually bring about changes to local or national rules," particularly those concerning secularism and gender equality. Such "municipal Islamism" risks affecting the public sphere and local politics, the report said, pointing to "the creation of increasingly numerous Islamist ecosystems."

France's conservative Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau expressed concern on Tuesday about "a low-level Islamism" whose "ultimate goal is to turn the entire French society to Sharia law." However, the report's authors said that "no recent document demonstrates the desire of Muslims in France to establish an Islamic state in France or to enforce Sharia law there."

Musulmans de France ("Muslims in France"), formerly the Union of Islamic Organizations of France, is identified as "the national branch of the Muslim Brotherhood in France." "We are not dealing with aggressive separatism" but a "subtle (...) yet no less subversive aim for the institutions," the authors said.

The report estimates that there are 139 places of worship affiliated with Muslims of France, with an additional 68 considered close to the federation. This represents 7% of the 2,800 Muslim places of worship listed in France, the report said. The Islamist movement is losing its influence in the Arab world and "focusing its efforts on Europe," it added. A public awareness campaign must be combined with renewed efforts to promote a "secular discourse" as well as "strong and positive signals to the Muslim community" including the teaching of Arabic, the report said.
Le Monde with AFP
Reuse this content Vous pouvez lire Le Monde sur un seul appareil à la fois

Ce message s’affichera sur l’autre appareil.

Découvrir les offres multicomptes - Parce qu’une autre personne (ou vous) est en train de lire Le Monde avec ce compte sur un autre appareil.

Vous ne pouvez lire Le Monde que sur un seul appareil à la fois (ordinateur, téléphone ou tablette). - Comment ne plus voir ce message ?

En cliquant sur « » et en vous assurant que vous êtes la seule personne à consulter Le Monde avec ce compte. - Que se passera-t-il si vous continuez à lire ici ?

Ce message s’affichera sur l’autre appareil. Ce dernier restera connecté avec ce compte. - Y a-t-il d’autres limites ?

Non. Vous pouvez vous connecter avec votre compte sur autant d’appareils que vous le souhaitez, mais en les utilisant à des moments différents. - Vous ignorez qui est l’autre personne ?

Nous vous conseillons de modifier votre mot de passe.
   Lecture restreinte
Votre abonnement n’autorise pas la lecture de cet article

Pour plus d’informations, merci de contacter notre service commercial.

Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot

[-]

coverageanalysisbot@reddit

Hi empleadoEstatalBot,

We've found 1 sources (so far) that are covering this story including:

Le Monde (Leans Left): "French report warns of 'subtle but subversive' spread of Muslim Brotherhood ideology"

So far, there hasn't been any coverage from the RIGHT.

Of all the sources reporting on this story, 0% are right-leaning, 100% are left-leaning, and 0% are in the center. Read the full coverage analysis and compare how 1+ 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.