Since it aired, I’ve felt uncomfortable with Harry’s statements about equality in the Quotidien interview and the resulting posts/articles about it, but I needed to step back and figure out WHY it made me feel that way. There was something about his language that immediately rubbed me the wrong way and to see how his statements have been used as some kind of great moment of activism has only added to my discomfort.
As a human rights worker, I spend every day trying to raise awareness and understanding of rights, to ensure that they are implemented properly in my country, and to establish effective forms of redress when there are rights violations. At the core of my value base is a belief in social justice, equality and non-discrimination, human dignity and human rights. In my ideal world, these would be fundamental truths for all people, but I recognise that, despite living in a relatively wealthy, developed nation, these are simply not realities for a large section of the population. The children and families I work with are facing poverty, mental health issues, family breakdown, discrimination, immigration difficulties, violence, trauma and neglect. For them, the idea of equality is directly connected to politics. The decisions made at local and national levels impact directly on their day-to-day experiences and their ability to ensure that their basic needs are met.
By stating that equality is something removed from politics, Harry demonstrated his privilege. As a wealthy and influential white man, he has privilege that allows him to remove himself from the political discourse of inequality and discrimination that define the lives of many others. That is not to say that Harry has not faced issues like those I mentioned above, but he has resources and connections that others can only dream of so that he doesn’t need to make his ‘fundamental’ beliefs about politics.
To me, his statement was not inspirational or demonstrative of a greater passion for and awareness of the issues that are impacting on our society today. It came across as a vague, ill-informed platitude, and
when it is being used to generate headlines, it demonstrates just how low the bar is set for him. Celebrities often use their status as a platform to raise awareness of causes or issues that are important to them. They are able to speak in specifics, demonstrating a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the topic. This is not what happened at Quotidien. In between a series of ‘ums’ and ‘I don’t knows’, Harry cobbled together a sentence to avoid a question he wasn’t comfortable answering.
This was not an example of activism. It was an example of not being aware of one’s own privilege. I would call out my friends and colleagues for making similar vague, ignorant statements, so I won’t hesitate to do so when a celebrity does it, especially when the fandom is holding it up as something to be applauded. I felt Harry’s statement was dismissive of the reality of people’s lived experience. Equality is directly connected to politics (and Politics). Ignoring that only makes the issues we face more difficult to overcome.
Russian President Vladimir Putin personally directed an attempt to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the 2016 U.S. presidential election, according to an intelligence report declassified and made public Friday.
The report, “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections,” noted that Moscow has for years attempted to meddle in American politics, but 2016 operations “demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity and scope of effort.” Read more
Afterward, Trump said in a statement that cyberattacks had no impact on the integrity of his victory. Read more
Citizen activism is as American as apple pie. Whether you call it a protest, a parade, a tea party, a town hall, a march, a sit-in, a patriotic rally, a picket line, a free speech event, or a nonviolent demonstration, your right to stand up peacefully for what you believe in is protected by the US Constitution. Read the First Amendment:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Does islamqa site provide wrong answers?Is that what you meant in recent post about abonoor promoting salih Al munajjad? What are the sources of learning for a layman on internet?
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
may Allah reward you for your question and seeking clarity. Please accept my apology due to the delay in response but I wanted to compile a list of websites before I could respond.
yes you are correct, islamqa provides wrong answers. here is one simple example out of the many.
in case you are confused about the answer, there is a unanimous agreement from the times of the Sahaabah, to their students, to the students of their students, to all the scholars who have followed them in guidance on the impermissibility of political demonstrations, speaking out against the rulers, etc for social injustice. The Prophet ﷺ taught us how to deal with every single affair in the religion, and no one from the Salaf have allowed demonstrations and rallies. yet the author of that website gives the incorrect fatwa and misguides his audience with this.
without spending more time in going through more of his posts, but perhaps the more serious issue with him (Saalih al-Munajjid), is his defence of an individual who denies things from the basic beliefs of a Muslim, such as the Scales on the Day of Judgment, makes takfeer of the entire Ummah by mentioning that there are no Muslim countries left in the world and declares all the Muslim rulers to be kuffar (disbelievers), assigns hypocrisy to some of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ (those who Allah عز و جل said He is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him), and belittles the Prophets, with foul statements in regards to them. if an individual was to say some of the above about one of our close companions or family members, i am quite sure we would be very quick to abandon this person and not associate with them in any way. yet…this author of the website not only continues to promote his work but rather continues to defend him. and this is why the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah have warned against the individual and the website.
so may Allah bless you, i advise you and all those who have jealousy for your religion, to be careful where you take your knowledge from. as for some of the good websites for laymen like myself to seek knowledge from. the following is not a complete list, but إن شاء الله it is a good starting point [i am assuming since you said for the ‘layman’ that you do not know arabic, if you are looking for arabic then let me know and بإذن الله i will provide some]:
We’re reading WHY WE MARCH this week. Here’s a bit about it:
On January 21, 2017, millions of people gathered worldwide for the Women’s March, one of the largest demonstrations in political history. Together they raised their voices in hope, protest, and solidarity. This inspiring collection features 500 of the most eloquent, provocative, uplifting, clever, and creative signs from across the United States and around the world. Each is a powerful reminder of why we march. As with the recent battle cry of “Nevertheless, she persisted,” these messages continue to reverberate daily and fortify a movement that will not be silenced.
Why do you think Sansa was so under prepared for life in the capital? For all her love of songs and courtesies, she has zero political education. Cat was her father's heir until her brother was born and ran Riverrun for years. Why was Sansa's education so lacking when compared to Robb or even Bran?
Actually I tend to think that there was a problem in the political education of all the Starklings, including Robb, and that this was informed by Ned’s desire to just be left with his family in the North. And while age is a perfectly good explanation for that in the case of the younger siblings, it’s utterly bizarre with Robb, being that he was only two years shy of his majority when the novels start, and that his status as heir and the future Warden of the North necessitates a deeper understanding of politics.
Sansa’s story serves to highlight the problem more than any of her siblings’
though because her story is the most political, and because she is the one Starkling who was thrust into
the heart of politics in royal court with absolutely no backup and no
one to guide her. Robb had Catelyn, the Blackfish and his experienced bannermen around to advise
him; Bran had ser Rodrik and Maester Luwin; even Jon had Jeor Mormont
and Donal Noye and Maester Aemon; who did Sansa have? Septa Mordane had
no experience and no understanding of politics and Ned was waist-deep in
trying to pick up Robert’s slack and figure out the truth about Jon
Arryn’s death, and it’s not like he was the best political player anyway
as demonstrated by his failure to utilize the power of his office. Which left Sansa on her own to act within her limited
experience, and was exacerbated by her idealistic views, and her beauty
= integrity and worthiness perspective.
Sansa’s isn’t simply a problem of education - that I can at least explain by her age and the fact that her education was no where near done by the time she came to King’s Landing; no, the problem is that Sansa was left to her own devices in the capital with no effective mentor and no direction or even basic explanation of their situation. Her betrothal meant she would be in direct and constant contact with both Cersei and Joffrey, something she was utterly unprepared for and yet she was left to figure things on her own. The situation with Lady, Ned’s guilt over it and the resulting distance from Sansa, and Sansa’s own need to rationalize it that led to her suppressing her own memories only made her even more vulnerable.
Now I wouldn’t say that Sansa had zero political education; as a girl, Sansa’s
political education was vastly different from anything her brothers’
received and centered on completely different things, so her political
action took shape in a different way. Things like courtesies, proper conduct and
attire, and a lady’s role in a household are part of a
girl’s political education since they are often the only tools afforded
to women in Westeros, and indeed we see Sansa utilize them effortlessly in the aftermath of Ned’s arrest as an intuitive employment of her education in carefully constructing her words and image. She was taught the importance of one’s image and cultivating it in a way that inspires loyalty, but she was not taught that a political image can be only that- an image. Which meant that she considered things like proper etiquette and beauty and highbirth to be signs of a good and worthy person, an idealistic (and elitist) view that was encouraged and rewarded by her Septa, and wasn’t challenged by Catelyn.
conservatives and centrists keep arguing that the left has a “rage” problem as though being angry about vast inequality and suffering is irrational. if someone lives in the current political and economic system and isn’t angry about the cruelty and inequality that it produces then they are incredibly privileged and willfully ignorant.
people have watched their friends and family die in horrific circumstances. they have watched themselves be discarded by a system that views them as disposable. i am actually concerned about the people who are not angry and who don’t want to be politically active in a moment like this. the left is trying to listen to the anger of the oppressed and to speak up for the voiceless. we should all be wanting to help bring about justice to prevent this from ever happening again. the people who don’t want to do that are once again showing that they will always put profits before people.
They began Saturday as a series of pop-up demonstrations outside several major airports. But by Sunday, the protests against President Trump’s temporary immigration freeze had leapt from those airports to squares and plazas in cities across the U.S.
Outside the White House, in Boston’s Copley Square and Battery Park in New York City, immigrant advocacy groups have organized protests to register their discontent with the executive order Trump signed Friday.
That order bars all refugees from entering the U.S. for 120 days, as well as citizens of seven largely Muslim countries for 90 days. The freeze also applies to green card holders, who are legal U.S. residents; they will need a case-by-case waiver to enter the country, which officials say will be granted so long as there is no evidence of the person presenting “a serious threat to public safety and welfare.”
“Protecting this nation and our people is the No. 1 priority of this president and our government,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Sunday, arguing that the immigration ban is the best way to do that.
Groups of protesters across the country disagree with that assessment — so much so that they make their objections readily evident with signs and chants, rallies and marches in at least a half-dozen different cities.
He is a radical left-winger often described as a Gallic Bernie Sanders, and was viewed as a complete political outsider just three weeks ago.
Benoit Hamon handily won France’s Socialist Party primary on Sunday, making him the party’s best hope to maintain its grip on power in presidential elections this spring.
A clear majority of the more than 1.3 million voters in the primary cast ballots for Hamon, crushing the political hopes of former Prime Minister Manuel Valls, an economic liberal who had been seen as the favorite heading into the election.
The Socialists have governed France under the increasingly unpopular President Francois Hollande for four years, and are given little chance in the presidential election this spring. But as Hamon has already demonstrated, political fortunes can change.
Josephine reacts to being told "gold is not your color" by cheeky child Quizzir
The lecture that follows is three hours long, touches on color theory and political alliances as demonstrated through fashion, the history of dye in trade and social classes, and features a guest appearance by Madame de Fer. By the time it is over the child is suitably chastised and promises never to comment on Josephine’s wardrobe again.
Josephine, meanwhile, is giggling her head off internally. She knows it was a joke, but she is also an older sister and has learned that the best revenge is one served both cold and with a purpose– so long as the victim can’ see it.
The photo shoot is going well. All of the boys showed up on time which is a miracle, and they were mostly behaving. You know you can’t expect them to be perfect, so you’ll take what you can get. The photographer wanted to try different jackets on Minhyuk and Hyungwon, and you had volunteered to get them. You are heading back to the shoot with the jackets when one of the photographer’s assistants stops you. He starts to flirt, and you politely demonstrate that you are not interested. He continues to flirt, and you apologize and tell him you really should be going. “Your boss wanted these jackets, and I don’t want to hold up the shoot.” You try to side step him, but his arm goes up blocking your way. He takes a step forward backing you into the wall. Your heart starts racing as adrenaline pumps through your body preparing you to fight or run.
When they say “deregulation” they never mean “getting rid of laws that hurt people”, they mean “getting rid of legal protections for human rights”.
It’s never “we’re going to stop abducting people and extorting them for money because they possessed a certain plant, chemical, or mechanical device” or “we’re going to stop violating peoples’ bodily autonomy and regulate certain medical procedures” or even “we’re going to stop extortion schemes that force people through mazes of licencing processes in order to organize political demonstrations, braid peoples’ hair, or even run a lemonade stand”.
It’s always “we’re going to let Mr. McMoneyson discharge his noxious industrial waste into your drinking water” or “we’re gonna legalize child slavery” or “we’re going to make it impossible for you to seek compensation when our friends wrong you”.
Pier Paolo Pasolini (1922-1975) was an Italian film director, poet, and writer. He distinguished himself as a journalist, philosopher, novelist, playwright, newspaper and magazine columnist, actor, painter, and political figure. He demonstrated extraordinary cultural versatility, becoming a highly controversial figure in the process. While his work remains controversial to this day, in the years since his death Pasolini has come to be valued by many as a visionary thinker and a major figure in Italian literature and art. He was born in Bologna, traditionally one of the most leftist Italian cities. His father was an army lieutenant; his mother was an elementary school teacher. In his childhood, his father was arrested for gambling debts. His mother moved with the children to her family’s house in Casarsa della Delizia in Friuli. That same year, his father saved Benito Mussolini’s life during Anteo Zamboni’s assassination attempt. He was openly gay and dated an underage boy. He was eventually murdered by being run over with his own car several times.
This isn’t like a call-out post or an attempt to score points by demonstrating how political I am in a fandom space, first of all. I do fandom stuff as recreation, while politics is work. I don’t like crossing those streams. But:
There seems to be this widespread sentiment that the Jedi could not be at fault for the various sins of the Republic, since they were servants of the Senate and not independent actors. They were following orders. They were enforcers, not decision makers. They were just well-meaning servants of a well-meaning government that carried out atrocious, monstrous things.
I don’t super care what degree of culpability you assign to the Jedi for the state of their fictional universe: that has very little bearing on reality, and I don’t think anybody’s necessarily, like, a police brutality apologist for their opinions on the space politics of a franchise written for twelve year olds. It’s cool, it’s whatever, I know I can’t extrapolate anybody’s real-life politics from their opinion about Star Wars.
But, none the less, I just want to make sure everybody hears it out loud if they haven’t before: in real life situations, when you find that you are part of an evil system, it is your responsibility to fight it. Even at great personal cost. Even if very reasonable, very respected people tell you it’s not really evil, it’s just [very levelheaded explanation of an evil thing, only necessary]. Even if it means you can’t keep your job, even if you lose some kind of power or standing, even if you’re punished for no longer cooperating. You are culpable, you have a responsibility to the victims and to your own conscience. This is very hard, but being hard doesn’t make it untrue.
I know you all have like complex inner lives and a personal relationship to your own moral compass. I just wanted to put it down in black and white in case somebody needed to hear it. I don’t think anybody’s bad for their (bad) Jedi opinions.