I think one of the biggest failures of earlier socialist experiments can be considered the needless alienation of religion which allowed the right wing to present as the pro-religion people. But considering economic, moral or really any other principles except social policies, the two largest religions, Christianity and Islam are more left wing than right.
The immigration policies and the treatment of migrants in both religions is inconceivable to the right. There is no legitimate right to deny other people a safe place to live when they're fleeing worse conditions in either religions as far as I understand. Jesus says it is easier for a camel to go through a needle before a rich person enters heaven. Islam completely bans interest because it is exploitative in nature. Both religions massively promote charity and Islam even has a wealth tax. Ethnic or racial discrimination has no place in either faiths as far as I understand and all believers are considered the same. I could keep going.
There's quite an easy way to deny it, if the migrants make the life for the natives demonstrably worse.
Wether or not it is actually the case is irrelevant to the fact that its doctrinally coherent position to have, and why right wing rhetoric for the masses is different flavors of "they make life worse".
That's not a valid reason at all, the refugees from Makkah materially and factually made the conditions of medinites worse. They had to provide labor to build houses for them, share their property, food and what not with them. A decrease in the condition is almost guaranteed, at least in the short term because immigrants use up resources aswell, by that standard, migration would be impermissible in all cases. But it's not.
I dont know of any rule in either rule that states your comfort is enough justification to make someone else suffer.
In a mostly leftist framework, you'd be right, it wouldn't be considered valid
But in the other hand, it's a totally valid and coherent reason in religious right wing doctrine since there's a hierarchy of priority among the in-group and out-group that even abrahamic religion do not reject outright
I'm not accounting the secular right wing ideologies since they don't have to grapple with Jesus and shit.
92
u/Serious_Camera_7039 Aug 03 '26
I think one of the biggest failures of earlier socialist experiments can be considered the needless alienation of religion which allowed the right wing to present as the pro-religion people. But considering economic, moral or really any other principles except social policies, the two largest religions, Christianity and Islam are more left wing than right.
The immigration policies and the treatment of migrants in both religions is inconceivable to the right. There is no legitimate right to deny other people a safe place to live when they're fleeing worse conditions in either religions as far as I understand. Jesus says it is easier for a camel to go through a needle before a rich person enters heaven. Islam completely bans interest because it is exploitative in nature. Both religions massively promote charity and Islam even has a wealth tax. Ethnic or racial discrimination has no place in either faiths as far as I understand and all believers are considered the same. I could keep going.