Skip to comments.MUSLIM WORLD: Young European man explains why he converted to Islam (Marxist turns to Islam)
Posted on 11/01/2010 3:21:39 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn
Why would a left-leaning young man from one of the world's most secular and liberal countries choose to become a pious Muslim?
The 34-year old Swedish music teacher from Stockholm, who asked that his last name not be published, attempted to explain his decision, describing it as the culmination of a long journey searching for faith and him solidifying his religious beliefs that he couldnt always place.
Whats the appeal? In part, Malcolm said, Islam fits in well with his left-wing views. In that sense, Islam fits me really well, he said. I am completely against capitalism.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
I guess he likes the idea of throwing people into gulags or whipping and stoning them.
Then he needs to move to an Islam country and really experience it.
If they are not living in an Islam country; they think nothing will happen. They can scream all they want because they want to be noticed.
A lot of musicians are attracted to Islam look at CatStevens.
Even know Music is equated to pork and alcohol in Islam.
Islam is a very attractive religion to many potential converts. It is simple, easy and there is no real demand for repentance. One can maintain and cherish animosities and pride. Islam is accommodating to the arrogant oppressor - a natural fit for any Marxist who decides maybe there is more than simple physical matter in the universe.
Former British PM Blair’s sister in law also converted. This will accelerate.
At least he admitted that being muslim means anti-capitalism.
Totally against capitalism!!
Where does he expect people to get money to pay for HIS services??
“At least he admitted that being muslim means anti-capitalism.”
Maybe he doesn’t know that Kuwait & Saudi Arabia are Muslim...
Anything that pulls civilization back and beyond the stone age, I guess.
Neither repressive politics nor repressive religion works...It depends on how you define "works". If you mean "allow freedom and liberty to bloom" then you are right, neither works.
But if you mean "able to retain power for decades or centuries" then they both "work".
Communism would still be in power in the Soviet Union if there had been no USA. And in fact, communism hasn't really been defeated, has it?
And Islam can create slave societies that last a thousand years, or more.
So slavery works. It most definitely works. If free people do nothing, slave holders rise up and build slave societies.
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia aren’t capitalist societies. Certainly Saudi Arabia isn’t. Kuwait I’m not so sure about. I suspect that Kuwait (like Saudi Arabia) allows certain types of business activity and dispenses certain business “freedoms” that the state can easily take away, anytime it wants.
And in both places, what you see as “capitalism” is just huge mountains of oil wealth. Not the same thing. Not by a long shot.
I guess when I say “works” I mean accomplishes what it SAYS is the goal.
It does accomplish its real goal, which is power for the ruling class. When people see it for what it is, sane people reject it, which is why both communism and Islam have to lie in order to get converts; communism lying by claiming not to be a religion, and Islam lying by claiming not to be a political system. In reality they are the same thing: a system whereby one supposedly-benevolent group of people (supposedly secular in communism and supposedly religious in Islam) dominates and controls everybody else by threats and punishment for dissenters.
In reality they are the same thing: a system whereby one supposedly-benevolent group of people (supposedly secular in communism and supposedly religious in Islam) dominates and controls everybody else by threats and punishment for dissenters.Very true.
I certainly don’t see Saudis or Kuwaitis sharing the wealth with their imported workforces; what are they?