What startled me was that I was considered to be a right wing nutter simply on the basis of my views on Islam. Me! A long-time Australian Labor Party supporter. Who'd voted Labor since Whitlam and right through to Keating. How very dare they! Call me right wing?!
I wrote a blog post about this, way back in 2010, titled "swimming with the right wing fishies".
The thing is: whatever my Occasional Readers thought about what I said about Islam, I did write about it with some knowledge. I read all the foundational texts of Islam, what I now call the Trinity of Islam -- The Koran (the Islamic Bible), the Hadith (stories about Muhammad) and the Sirah (the official life of Muhammad by Ibn Ishak). I read in detail the actual detailed texts of Sharia law, via the standard text on Sunni Sacred Law, the Umdat al-Salik.
I wrote that Islam is more than a religion. It is an ideology. I said it was (and is) a horrid ideology. That it combines the worst of fascism with the worst of communism then slathers it with the worst of a cult religious belief, a death cult, with a belief in a supernatural being that makes it unfalsifiable. A horrid religion and a horrid ideology. I thought. And that made me a right winger apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that subjugates women is right wing, apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that oppresses or kills gay people is right wing, apparently. Being against a religious ideology that suppresses free speech is right wing, apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that hates on non-Muslims is right wing, apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that sectarian is right wing, apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that wants to kill all jews is right wing, apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that burns churches is right wing, apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that demands supplication to its religious laws of Sharia is right wing, apparently.
- Being against a religious ideology that wants to dominate the world is right wing, apparently.
But, hey! I've got a life to live, so I didn't mind too much the label. Save that I didn't accept it. I still felt I was a person of the Left. Just that I didn't like a totalitarian ideology like Islam is all. And in that dislike there were -- and still are -- many totally bona fide Left wingers. One of the most famous: Sam Harris.
Why am I writing about this again? Because again I'm charged with being Right wing and again I deny it.
An Occasional Reader says to me: "Of course, you're a conservative. A right wing person".
I say: "No, I'm not. I view myself as an Independent. As a member of the Heterodox Academy".
OR: "But you're right wing. Go on admit it. There's nothing to be ashamed of".
Me:"Except I'm not. I don't accept the label".
OR: "But you have to. What you think you are is irrelevant. You are what other people think you are".
Me: "Well, I don't accept it. I say I am what I believe I am, and that's an independent".
OR: "You're no way a centrist".
Me: "I didn't say centrist. Just independent".
OR: "Very well. Name some left wing views you have".
Me: "Many. Like on Gun Control. Abortion, I'm pro choice, of the Bill Clintonian type -- safe, legal and rare. On minority rights, support. Just don't support trans men in women's spaces, or transing pre-pubescent youths".
OR: "That doesn't make you centrist".
Me: "I didn't say centrist. I said independent".
And so it went on.
And in the end I wonder. Is it true that I'm only what other people think I am? I guess on one level it surely it. For example, if everyone thinks I'm a jerk, while I think I'm god's gift to mankind, the fact of the matter is, I'm a jerk. Because everyone thinks I am. Because all they see is that I'm a jerk.
But what the OR and I are talking about is something a bit different isn't it?
For a start, there's the fact that people accepting you for what you believe you are is very much a Left wing thing. Think the whole trans issue. If I believe I'm a woman, I'm a woman. If I believe I'm a furry animal, I'm a cat, or cheetah. And we are required to affirm that belief.
But then not even I believe that. I call it woo-woo. I call it woke nonsense. If someone believes they're Napoleon, we might humour them for a while, but we don't really affirm it. We don't affirm the anorexic girl's belief that she's too fat.
Nevertheless, there must surely be times when what people think of us is off the mark. For example, everyone thought Jimmy Saville was the most wonderful man. Until they learned he was a serial nonce. What did he think of himself all that time, when the outside world didn't know, or didn't want to know? Surely he knew himself better, and surely he knew what he was.
Or take the man of the moment, Donald Trump. People think about him in all sorts of ways. To his supporters, that he's a world wonder. Those who don't say he's all sorts of things. Just today on MSNBC I heard people say, in all seriousness that he's a narcissistic sociopath and a felon. He's none of these things, at least in my view. Even that difference in perceptions must make us rethink the concept that we are what people say we are, surely. After all, half of America had TDS and the other half worshipped him. Meantime, he has a fine family and they all appear to love him. That's a difference right there, isn't it?
The I think of this: that the white man in the United States at one time thought all Black men were sub-human. Treated as slaves. Did that mean they were indeed sub-human and should be enslaved? Of course not. But that was the view of other people about another people, of a different colour. So how can the OR say, in sweeping terms, "you are what others think you are, no matter what you may feel you are".
In any case, I'm what I think I am, at least to me. To me, I'm pretty liberal. With some right of centre views. Which I came to by looking at the issue.
But that might just make me a jerk.
Oh well.... Happy 2025!
