Ok...

Ok, so at uni today I got in an argument with a lvl 62 libtard over the compatibility of Islam and "Western Civilization"

>Muslims can be democratic, just look at the secular government of Tunisia, Turkey, Lebanon, Morocco
The governments of these countries sometimes have to shut down Mosques and places of religious gatherings because Muslims are preaching that democracy is a plague and they also insinuate violent behavior. Now, political Islamist / Islamic democrat parties are gaining influence (and obviously support) while they enact authoritarian methods

>In Egypt, liberals and Islamists both believe Islam and even Islamic law are compatible with democracy
Sure they say that, but do they practice democracy? They seem to be at war with one another and forcing people to choose sides. Also, look at the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic parties... they won 75% of the total seats in 2012 in Egypt

>Muslim ideals are changing, and adaptions of their religion are conforming more to western liberalism. They can change!
Lmao obviously not all of them, otherwise this wouldn't even be a debate, much less probably the biggest political controversy today

>Popular support for democracy is highest in predominantly Muslim countries; neither culture nor religion offers a convincing explanation for the Arab democracy deficit
Are these Muslim countries actually democracies or just "Partly Free"? Also, these so called democracies are experiencing political regression, so "democracy" doesn't seem to be working to well

I can't really remember the rest of the argument, but these were most of my points. I think I handled myself alright, but what happens when I'm approached by a lvl 99 libtard who fully believes western liberalism is compatible with Islam? I need more redpills or else I won't survive here

Shout Allahu Ackbar, pull a knife and slit their throat.

Thats very tolerant of you Mr. Burger, you've earned a gold star.
But seriously he might give you standing ovation for that.

Libtards tend to have tough skin

Democracy is a fucking plague of degeneracy. Is this post trying to convert me?

Great blog post. Subscribed.

Communist scum

...

>hey guys, I choked and need you to argue for me

You're a loser. Form your own opinions instead of relying on a Chinese anime forum, mental peasant.

Hey, fucking retard! Islam might be bad but democracy is infinitely worse.

Gibsmocracy is communism-lite you recessed gene pool retard.

All of those places they gave as an example of secular democracies are completely fucked, horrible countries.

All you did is reveal your power level while having a massive sperg out, OP. You showed you're very poorly read, very ignorant, and not a good student while probably also being a crypto-nazi or white separatist.

Muslims can be democratic, because:
- democracy and ethnicity don't coincide. Look at the history of democracy around the world since the Ancient Greeks and you'll see this. Any people are city is capable of democracy. Also, your counter-examples don't show that democracy didn't exist in those Muslim state. Instead, your examples just show that there were some limits or constraints on democracy. You seem to think that if democracy isn't perfect, then it doesn't exist. This is the argument of a retard.

The rest of your points aren't even worth addressing.

Before you speak again on this subject, you have to read:
- Malise Ruthven, Historical Atlas of Islam. OUP, 2004.
- Albert Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples/. Faber, 1991.
- Marshal GS Hodgson, The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization. University of Chicago Press, 1974-77.
- Roy Mottahedeh, The Mantle of the Prophet: Religion and Politics in Iran. Oneworld. 2000.

Until you've read these, you shouldn't venture any more retarded opinions on the subject and you should accept that all your classmates and peers hate you for being a really dumb wannabe Nazi.

fuck you nigger faggot go choke on a circumsized dick

I mean I didn't choke, but I'm afraid of graduate students with a hard on for Islam

I mean, almost two-thirds of countries around the world are now electoral democracies, but among the 47 countries with a Muslim majority, only one-fourth are electoral democracies--and none of the core Arabic-speaking societies falls into this category

I just don't think democracy and specifically Islamic culture are compatible. Perfect democracy doesn't really exist anywhere, but the core political values of 'Murica's western democracy does not coincide with Islamic views such as "separation of religious and secular authority, rule of law and social pluralism, parliamentary institutions of representative government, and protection of individual rights and civil liberties as the buffer between citizens and the power of the state" (that one guy who wrote Clash of Civilizations)

Oh and thanks for the reads

Democracy works well when only one group with specific and very limiting entry requirements has the power to vote. It's been that way since ancient Greece, only in the modern era has that changed and even then, the purity of the vote is highly questionable.

Democracy in itself as an ideology isn't bad, just the convoluted way it's implemented everywhere (and probably the only functional way in our lifetime)

Now you almost sound like you know what you're talking about, but Samuel Huntington is a massive troll and always was, even when his article and then book first came out. You keep narrowing your categories so that your examples have no relationship to your initial position. Honestly, you don't know enough about these subjects to come in really hard with a position on Islam and democracy. You're right that Arabic countries aren't well set up for American liberal democracy of the kind described by Alexis de Tocqueville, but that point is so stupid it's not even worth making. Read a lot more and then revisit this topic. In the meantime, try forming modest and local opinions grounded in your own information base.

>Democracy works well when only one group with specific and very limiting entry requirements has the power to vote.
Like "citizens"? This point is so broad that it means nothing. Odd.

While I could probably play a level 100 LibWizard for you, I am tired and old and must retire. Know that you did okay this time young one. Come back tomorrow for more training.

Sounds like you're better informed than most Sup Forumsacks who just spam infographics. Nice job.

You did kind of fail by accepting their frame though. "Muslims CAN be democratic" isn't really an argument you want to get into. Muslims, by and large, CAN NOT be democratic. Even the exceptions seem to be on their way out. Be careful with how shitlibs phrase their arguments, they're ALWAYS looking to make exceptions appear as the rule.

Also, you forgot to mention at the end that "they can change" isn't an argument for bringing them into the west en masse. Let them change their own countries, then the suggestion will be less insane.

I don't know enough about this topic, that's why I came to Sup Forums for help. I probably should've specified in my first post that I meant Islamic culture versus western liberal values

I don't specifically mean Tocqueville's version of democracy, but rather the ideologies that come with western liberalism. There's opposition to western ideology all across the Middle East, and this opposition is supported by the people residing in these counties. Saudi Arabia is an extreme example with Wahhabism, but is it not true that many of these traditionalist Muslims abhor western liberalism?

Obviously there are Muslim advocates for western liberalism, but they are met with a lot of opposition from their Islamic counterparts

>turkey
>democratic
>lebanon
>democratic
you fucked up, the correct response to something that stupid is to simply start laughing until they walk away

Democracy sucks bigly bro.

Trump is president of the United States. You're really still on the NRx bandwagon? What is it, 2012?

I await you, senpai

I mean if they don't believe exceptions can be the rule, then how can they establish an argument? I mean I can slap them hard with the current state of affairs for these "secular" countries but will that end the argument or insinuate further discussion of democratic Muslims (westernized) vs. traditionalist Muslims?

Then I can't reveal my power level like the autist I am

It's not about what "can be". It's about "what is". If they're arguing about "what can be", and it looks nothing like "what is", their argument is probably BS. Force them to acknowledge "what is" before even moving on to their utopian thought experiments.

Islam forbids and calls for the death of homosexual.

=

End of argument

Good point

Do all Muslims believe in the persecution of homosexuals? Will they kill little Mohammed in Israel for liking dick?