Experts Agree: Sam Harris Is A Joke

In this Majority Report clip, more like "Scam Harris" amirite folks?

"Sam Harris, one of the original members of the group dubbed the “New Atheists” (by Wired!) 12 years ago, says he doesn’t like tribalism.

...

But apparently Harris doesn’t think he is part of that “we.” After he accused Klein of fomenting a “really indissoluble kind of tribalism” in the form of identity politics, and Klein replied that Harris exhibits his own form of tribalism, Harris said coolly, “I know I’m not thinking tribally in this respect.”"*

[clairebun]

I don't listen to Sam Harris anymore, but when the speaker suggests that Sam is spreading hatred of Muslims, they instantly lose me. I was expecting a nuanced critique of Sam Harris's opinions on the middle east, and instead what I got was a hit piece with clickbait.

This kind of shit is what people mean when they say the left is eating itself.

[Freefd]

Critizing Christianity= fine
Critizing Islam = islamaphobia

[andreborges]

This is where Sam loses me. Why don't you chose to use data such as asking Muslims what they believe to be the punishment for leaving their religion? The census are out there, and they ain't very favorable to their community.

[w]

They guy doesnt even answers in specifics what Sam has said is wrong instead just shows how the parallels applies to Christianity and so Islam isnt that bad. Fact being, all religions are bad and some are worse than others..

[MFink-oqhy]

At what point does Seder and co. realize that they're the problem, not Sam Harris?

[mhk]

I was muslim almost my entire life and I'm from muslim country. with great inside knowledge, I aggre almost everyting Sam Harris saying about islam.

[Kori]

2, 600 comments, 40, 000 views, Tons of negative comments, 41 Likes ZERO Dislikes. What the hell is that about?

[Cjs]

to believe in religion is to disbelieve what is right in front of your face .

[chissssssss]

HOLD ON A SECOND PEOPLE OF YOUTUBE

1. Sam has never said all muslims are bad.
2. Atheists have never mass murdered people in the name of 'not believing in a specific God that other people happen to believe in'. In other words, Stalin didn't kill millions of people BECAUSE of dogma. Not believing in something for lack of evidence is not dogma. For an academic, this is a really really bad logical error to make.
3. Sam's argument is that all dogma is bad, but there are differences between those dogmas in how bad they are. He then assumes that whatever is written in the holy books is to be understood as the literal word of God based on what it says in the books itself. Based on that assumption he then says that islam is worse than christianity. Nobody says that it is impossible for people to interpret the text historically or symbolically, but it is not unreasonable to suggest that it is harder to prove that what is written in the word of God is not to be understood how it is literally written, but instead in another way. Whatever that way may be is uncertain and subjective. You can disagree with his argument but that doesn't mean that therefore the guy is a joke.

[BobBob-wbld]

At 9:02, all credibility this expert may have had in regards to Harris crumbles. He just spews lies and slander.

[KarelianStarmaster]

As some have already commented, this video is pretty much just an excercise in strawman tactics. And the video title is just... SMH. I’m definitely not a fan of everything Sam Harris says, but at least he knows the value of civilized rhetoric.

[GEricM]

Atheism was the cause of genocide huh? Which verse in the atheist bible was it that got interpreted wrong?

[rofl]

I'm an ex-Muslim from Iran. Anybody who claims that Islam is a religion of peace does not have the slightest fucking clue about what they're talking.

[pakalak]

The idea that you can find all kinds of issues with Christianity and yet none with Islam is ridiculous. As a former Muslim, and one who still states that it is "supposed" to be a religion of peace, I can whole heatedly admit that there are flaws in it. Those flaws are just as relevant as the flaws in Christianity. Sam is not spreading hate anywhere. He is taking Islam on with the same attitude as Christianity. It is not Islamophobic to suggest that the religion is flawed just like the other one's and that large groups of people within the religion are finding justification for their evil acts within their own doctrine. Just like the West Borrow Baptists twist, distort, take literally, take figuratively, make assumptions, and ultimately find their own justifications within their own religion, so do many in Islam. This why he hates dogmatism so much. Dogmatism ALLOWS for this kind of behavior to occur. It doesn't make Sam a racist or an Islamophobe for pointing it out. He would prefer that their were no religions. I have to end it there, because now this topic turns into the Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris conversation about whether we should or should not have religions.

[alienanxiety]

Why does the Majority Report cover for religious extremism?

[alixmordant]

Not believing is the absolute greatest possible sin in Islam (and other religions). Obviously, the word "atheist" is not used in the Qur`an, but the words kafir, murtad and riddah are. All those concepts are used to refer to the treatment of what we call "atheists". Kafir (unbeliever/disbeliever) is generally used for people who do not follow Islam. Murtad, or apostate, refers to ex-Muslims. Since the concept of freedom of religion does not exist, the punishment for "atheism" and apostasy is traditionally *death*.

This is a specific problem for the murtad. Why? In the practice of pre-modern times because the dhimmi (mostly Christian, Jews) are very useful, paying the jizya tax (Islamic states always had problems getting enough tax revenue, since the "Islamic" taxes were too low to allow a state to function). In modern times, well, good luck trying to execute foreigners. But an ex-Muslim in Muslim majority countries is without that protection; they either get executed or have to face other severe punishment (look up the case of the blogger Raif Badawi). In the best case, you are expelled, your marriage annulled and your belongings/money taken away from you.

And do not forget the mob, which is at the moment prone to kill any apostate or even "blasphemer" (which is by the way seen as a sign for apostasy...). Did you follow (the ongoing? there is not much news about it thanks to pro-religion bias) case of Asia Bibi in Pakistan? Please look it up, e.g. in the Guardian and be delighted in the "peacefulness" of the average Muslim on Pakistani streets who wants to hang a Christian women (who was kept for 8 years in solitary confinement in prison) who did somehow slightly criticise (allegedly!) Mohammed, according to a few other women who did not like her drinking from the same cup as them...

To be specific: Riddah (apostasy) is mentioned in the Qur`an 3:90, 4:91, 9:11, 9:12, 9:66, 16:106, but there is no reference to the earthly punishment for riddah, only the punishment by Allah in the afterlife.

But the hadith is more specific. The hadith is in practice just as important as the Qur`an. Why? Here an example:

The concept of "5 pillars of Islam" is crucial to the Islamic faith. Yet this concept is not described or defined in the Qur'an in any way. It is only found in the hadith. Four out of five of Islam’s Pillars would not make any sense without the Hadith. Without the hadith, Islam would not be "Islam" as it is.

*In Sahih al-Bukhari, the most important book of hadith in Sunni Islam after the Qur´an, punishments for apostasy are described as follows:[43][44]

Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:83:17, see also Sahih Muslim, 16:4152, Sahih Muslim, 16:4154
Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'"

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:260
A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu'adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu'adh asked, "What is wrong with this (man)?" Abu Musa replied, "He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism." Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle."

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:89:271* (Wikipedia)


And that is why I have a huge problem with apologists who distort the truth: Real people, vulnerable, often poor people are suffering right now under Islamic rule. But an "expert" like Cole just wants to whitewash his favourite subject, disregarding the truth for personal reasons.

[alixmordant]

Facts matter to me. As a leftist, I am saddened that so many of my fellow leftists abandoned facts and embraced ideology. This is harming real life people. Vulnerable, poor people, all around the world. I come from Germany and even if I did "only" study Cultural Anthropology/Ethnology, I was looking into Islam for a long time. I actually know Muslims, because unlike in the US, there are more around here. They are just like any other people: some are great, some are not - humans like you and me. Their *religion (any religion*, mind you!) has to be criticised, because it is factually problematic, clashing with a modern, free world with Universal Human Rights for the individual (including women, LGBTQ-people, dissenters/Freethinkers).

I am defending the fact that Islam (and other religions) is not as peaceful, harmless and humane as apologists like Juan Cole want to paint it. I defend the right to criticise any religion, ideology or idea. I defend Universal Human Rights. I defend a modern, free, open society. I defend democracy.

Because a true democracy is NOT possible without independent and critical thinking.

[tybrady]

Why the hatred for Sam? I do not hear any great arguments being made, which makes me think there is a bit jealousy happening.

[chasecain]

How in the hell is every comment negative, mentioning that they have disliked but the video shows 0 dislikes??

[alixmordant]

The problem of slavery in the Arab and also Islamic world is wilfully ignored. That included sex slaves. Mohammed had slaves and sex slaves. Is that not a problem for leftists like us? Is that not worth mentioning? I think it was Mauretania which was the last country to abolish slavery; that was in 1981. Yes, 1981! Other majority-Muslim countries were hardly better, e.g. Oman abolished slavery in 1970, North Yemen and Saudi Arabia in 1962. We leftists condemn slavery - why give Muslim slavery a pass? Why ignore a huge problem?