Why does Australia want to punish it's citizens for fighting against despotism?

     The Australian government is seeking to pass a law that would strip their citizens of their citizenship if they go to Syria and fight against the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad.

http://muslimvillage.com/2014/01/22/48932/australians-fighting-in-syria-risk-loosing-citizenship/

     There are already Australian laws making fighting in Syria, (for any side), illegal for Australian citizens or dual Australian/Syrian citizens as well.

http://muslimvillage.com/2012/08/29/27701/australian-citizens-fighting-in-syrian-conflict-illegal-australian-government/

      There are a number of things wrong with these laws/proposals.
      1. This conflict does not concern Australia or the Australian government, so why do they feel like they have the right to regulate it? What gives them the right to tell their citizens "You don't have the right to fight to protect people who just want basic human rights"?

      2. By doing this, they are telling their citizens that the ideal of fighting to protect other people is not the correct thing to do. This reeks of neo-liberalism because it the regulation of morality, and that the liberals in government know what's best for us, even better than we do.

      3. By doing this, the Australian government is establishing the norm that violence is an 100% automatic "radical and extreme act," (except when the Australian government and/or military does it, of course). How did I come to this conclusion? A logical path following the government's statements on this. The Australian government said that the reason they already have these laws, and why they seek this new proposal, is because they are worried about "Australians becoming extremist and returning home." If they were truly worried about this, they had better come up with something else, because this law will not address that worry at all.
      Just because an Australian goes over to Syria to fight, does not mean that they will become radicalized. Violence, in of itself,  is not an extreme or radical action. On the contrary, it is rational, logical, and in line with human psychology, (which is why you have to train or be indoctrinated to be a pacifist, because non-violence is against the primal psychology of humans). Risking yourself to save another person has historically been seen as selfless, brave, and noble. Now, the Australian government seeks to turn that norm upside down. Now, risking yourself to save someone else is seen as "radical" and "extreme," not to mention illegal.     

      4. The laws and proposal insinuate that ALL Syrian rebels are extremists, and that by simply fighting alongside them, you will be brainwashed by their radicalism, and become extreme.
      One only need to do a simple Google search to see that not all of the Syrian rebels are religious extremists. The rebels are not one monotonous group, as many racist and bigoted Americans would want you to believe. There are religious radicals under the ISIS, (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria), umbrella, who are linked to Al-Qaida. The other rebel umbrella is the FSA, (Free Syrian Army), which is a secular and moderate organization. Saying that all Syrian rebels are terrorists is a simpleton's cop-out of looking at the conflict, and not reflective of reality at all. Saying so is an insult to the FSA, as they make a point to distinguish themselves from the ISIS in ideology and fighting tactics. It is also an insult because hundreds of FSA combatants have given their lives fighting against the ISIS, to prevent the radicals from hijacking the revolution, killing civilians, imposing a twisted version of Islam upon a population who doesn't want it, etc, etc. For more on this, you can do a simple Google search or visit the Institute for the Study of War's blog entry:

http://iswsyria.blogspot.com/2014/01/syrian-rebels-attack-isis.html

      5. The Australian government, by doing this, is pushing another disturbing neo-liberalist norm: That dictatorships, oligarchies, and fascism is okay, but democracy, universal human rights, and freedom is not. By not allowing people to fight as rebels against Assad, (whose government is all three of those descriptions: a dictatorship, an oligarchy, and a fascist regime), the Australian government is saying "Assad's way of government is acceptable to us."

      So there you have it, 5 reasons why these Australians laws and proposal are stupid all the way around. It only ends up hurting the Syrian people, who need every combatant they can get to protect themselves, and gives the Australian government Not only that, it is against traditional Australian values, which is all the more reason why we should disapprove of these laws. Australians are a people that pride ourselves in ideals like freedom and democracy, and also helping our fellow man. The country has a history of individual Australians traveling to fight in foreign wars that they believed were justified. All of a sudden, the current Australian government is calling that historical tradition wrong, illegal, and not noble. Australians serving in the British Army volunteered to fight in the Russian Civil War in 1918-1919, Australian citizens volunteered in fighting in the Spanish Civil War, (mostly on the Republic's side but there were some on the fascist's side as well), the Boer War, and the Rhodesian military, just to name a few. These volunteers were regarded as heroes and patriots. Now suddenly the same action gets you branded a terrorist and a traitor to your country! How does fighting in a war that your government is not involved in considered a traitorous act?! It has nothing to do with Australia! Which is the exact reason why the Australian government should just BUTT THE FUCK OUT OF THIS AND FUCKING MIND THEIR OWN FUCKING GOD DAMN BUSINESS AND STOP TRYING TO CONTROL EVERYTHING!            

Defending the Brave

Current Events

Monday July 16^th, 2012

I came across this article a few days, dated from Thursday July 12^th:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/12/taking-up-rebel-cause-woman-trades-toronto-apartment-for-battle-zone/

It explains how a Canadian woman of Syrian origin, Thwaiba Kanafani, left Canada to go fight with the Syrian rebels against the dictator Bashar al-Assad, (the Syrian rebels rally under the banner of the Free Syrian Army, or FSA). She is an engineer and a mother of two. 

Now, it is common knowledge that there are several brave and selfless foreigners that are fighting with the Syrian rebels, but most of them are men from other Arab countries. I’ve never heard of a Western woman joining them yet; Kanafani is the first. After I was done reading the article, I thought “Wow this woman is really flippin’ cool. She leaves the comfort of a peaceful, 1^st world country to go and help people halfway across the world achieve freedom and democracy. She is not required to do this at all; she goes there on her own free will to help in a fight where she has no stake in whatsoever. She is the very definition of selfless because she has absolutely nothing materially to gain from this.”

What really disturbed me was when I read some of the comments on the article. Here is a few of them: 

“Good to know that Canada is NOT your homeland, now you stay where you are you've shown your true colours. You earn your living here  you raise your kids here & still doesn't feel this country to be your homeland -how ungrateful you could be. We don't need people with deranged mentallity to be Canadians. Our immigration system is broken it needs to fixed.”

“Don't come back ! I do not want my tax money ( Canadian Medicare ) to pay for your Syrian injuries. Syria.....your homeland......give me a break ! Why did you leave ? Go home.”

“Hopefully she bought a one way ticket and took her kids with her.  She was obviously welcomed in Canada, but has no loyalty to the country.”

“Hope she stays there forever.”

When I read these I literally had a WTF moment. How the hell can these people sit there and say such horrible things about this woman, who did something so dangerous that I bet NONE of them would ever have the courage to do so. They are the biggest internet trolls I have ever seen. They sound like they have something lacking in their lives, so they just get on the internet and take out their frustration on someone like Kanafani who did something so brave and self-sacrificing. I also suspect that there might be some racist reasons involved in this as well. It’s not for certain, because I cannot read their minds, but it certainly sounds like it. They’re calling her “not a real Canadian, a Canadian by convenience.” This echoes of the mindset decades ago of the British deciding that only white people could be British citizens. 

My three points about what they said are:

1.      Just because she goes and fights in a war that Canada is not involved in, that has nothing to do with her loyalty to Canada. The two things have no rational/logical connection to each other. That’s like saying “Oh, since the sky is blue, that’s the reason why this safe is steel plated.” She is going overseas to help people who very desperately need anyone’s help who is willing to give it. Even if she is not a front line combat soldier, she is an engineer, which is very valuable for a rebel army to have. Also, since she is a woman, she will be better able to understand and work with women civilians who have been caught up in the conflict. Good men will try their best of course but sometimes a situation needs a woman-to-woman approach to fix it, (like if a woman got raped by a Syrian soldier, she’d much rather talk to a woman about that than to a man). 

          In the past, when someone has helped somebody else fight against a tyrannical or oppressive government, that person is looked upon as a hero, a caring person. An example would be like the French soldiers who helped fight alongside the Americans against the tyrannical British government. Or the American soldiers who helped Europe fight back against the Nazis. Their service, their sacrifice in battle, was never, ever looked upon as being disrespectful or insulting to the country that they lived in. This concept is also portrayed in countless movies, video games, and books. Were the Americans doing disservice to America by helping to liberate France and Belgium? Of course not!!!

          She is not a mercenary; she is not getting paid to fight in this war. All of this is on her. She is a volunteer. Why is it that when a person volunteers to join the military of his/her county, he/she is “patriotic, brave, noble,” etc, but when another person wants to help people in another country, then suddenly that is dumb, ungrateful, or fanatical? Canada’s military is not in Syria, so she had no way of helping the Syrians if she joined the Canadian military. 

2.      I also read, on another article on the same story, that many posters called her a slut or a whore for joining the Syrian rebels. This is disgraceful to all women who have ever served in any military. Their libelous comments are only reinforcing the hateful stereotypes that women who join the military are just looking for men to sleep with. Maybe some of them are, no one knows because you can’t read all of their minds. But certainly not all of them are, that is an insult to the women who want to join the military to protect their country, make a better life for themselves, etc etc.

3.      One last point is this: In many of those comments they call Kanafani a “Wahabi/Salafi militant,” or a “Islamofascist.” These insults are within a larger problem, which is a lot bigger than this one post can cover. The problem is that many Westerners have this the paranoid xenophobic fear that all Muslims who take up arms to defend themselves and other civilians are without doubt Islamic terrorists. To them, Muslims are sub-human, and therefore, do not deserve the God given right that all humans have: to defend themselves and others who cannot defend themselves. These insults are only used to try and delegitimize the Syrian rebels. Are there radical Islamists fighting in Syria? Of course there is some. But does that have anything to do with the legitimacy of regular, ordinary Syrians who are fighting for their families, liberty and freedom? Uh, no.

             Radicals are always drawn to conflicts because in the chaos they can try and establish a foothold. You better damn well better believe that, for instance, if the U.S. descended into chaos, that there would be some white-supremacists who would take advantage of the situation and start to go around to kill African Americans, Hispanics, Muslims etc. There would be racists from all races, taking advantage of the situation.  

          These internet trolls are just stupid, spiteful people. Plain and simple. There’s no way around it. It is sad that some people have lost the ageless concepts such as honor, sacrifice, selflessness, and bravery in the face of tyranny. I guess those concepts are too higher levels for their pea brains. They see something they don’t understand, and then automatically call it deranged, idiotic, or morally wrong. They couldn’t be farther from the truth.

(Picture is from Thwaiba Kanafani's profile on Facebook).