Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Religious extremism can be very convincing when you are into it. The problem is very similar to the editor religion. Unless you are shown the other part of the world you may never realize the futility of your ideology and actions.

Saudi Arabia is a Monarchy, frankly speaking the monarchy should/would have collapsed long time back if not the for the systematic information control and low ball offers made by the royal family to the citizens. The Saudi Regime survives on creating a useless welfare state, fueling religious passion and creating things like the religious police, and then of course providing some good facilities at the Islamic holy sites.

What they provide to the their citizens is actually nothing in front of what they steal. The current king abdullah's father had some tens of wives, from which he had tens of kids. The family's strength is well placed at some 15,000 members currently. They are almost growing at a near exponential rate. The problem is each member of the family sort of demands a share of the pie, and its quite well known that much of wealth of the nation is shared among the members of the Saud Family. With so many thousands of them being present, to prevent a break down and rebellion among family members, most government high posts, money making job positions, contracts and anything of financial significance always goes to the saud family members.

The family also has very close ties to a religious family called Al-Sheik. And they often marry among each other to preserve their trust and dependency on each other. Apart from that it is believed, the saud family members also marry among other clans and tribes to keep them in picture too.

The common masses, are well made to believe they are living under a generous king whose duties extend beyond that of state matters and also include doing the holy work of god.




Saudi Arabia isn't quite as bad as Medieval England, where you could be hung, drawn and quartered (a horrific way to exit this world), but pretty damn close...

Man publicly beheaded in a Saudi Arabian car park for being a 'sorcerer' : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2055636/Sudanese-man...

Saudi Arabian man beheaded and crucified... his severed head was then sewn back on to his body, which was later hung from a pole in a public place: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/saudi-arabian-man...

A British male nurse was arrested and savagely battered in Saudi Arabia for being gay — then warned he faced death by beheading: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3503178/Execution-...


> Saudi Arabia is a Monarchy, frankly speaking the monarchy should/would have collapsed long time back if not the for the systematic information control and low ball offers made by the royal family to the citizens.

Don't forget unquestioned support from western governments.


Don't forget unquestioned support from western governments.

The support has not always been "unquestioned." Trade and normal diplomatic relations with the Saudi monarchy has never implied agreement with its position on Jewish settlement in Israel, for example. The 1975 cover article in Harper's magazine "Seizing Arab Oil" by "Miles Ignotus" (Latin for "unknown soldier," a pen name for a State Deparatment official who later was revealed to be Henry Kissinger) was part of a public warning to Saudi Arabia that it couldn't do just whatever it pleased and still expect the normal give-and-take of friendly diplomatic relations.

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Document-reveals-Nixo...

Saudi Arabia hasn't been invaded, while Iraq has,

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2003/03/thirty-year-itch

mostly because the national regime there balances its interests and desires with the interests and desires of other national governments that have the power to seize its source of national power: low-cost petroleum production. The domestic policies of Saudi Arabia look horrifically backward to me, but they are changing,

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-paris-hilton-...

and pushing for more liberalization more of the time is something that Western countries increasingly see as an expedient thing to do with other countries (and themselves!) as the world grows smaller and more interconnected.


OTOH, the west would probably support any kind of stable government there. KSA doesn't have seem to have much else other than oil, so they would have to cooperate as well. Foreign support may provide credentials to the ruling family, but in the end it's the citizens (or in their case, subjects) that define their collective fate.


they're also vahabi which is very extremist part of islamic nation so it's not quite suprising actually. As you see if an islamic country which has a solid relationship with western countries(money, petrol, strategic position in middle east), event they have monarchy, even they're degenerated, they don't need to be forced by USA, EU to have a democracy which others, Iraq, Syria already are having. God bless America


Interesting that what you described is reminiscent of the Jahiliyyah. Al Saud, in this context, reminds me of Quraysh.


> Interesting that what you described is reminiscent of the Jahiliyyah

In what way?


> Unless you are shown the other part of the world you may never realize the futility of your ideology and actions

Exactly. If you think christianity is any better, I've got news for you:

http://www.towleroad.com/2012/05/nc-pastor-wants-to-build-el...


Of course, because one loon is easily equated with the entire Christian base.

Also notice how the parent never mentioned "Islam". Please don't start a fight that doesn't belong here.


Oh, did evangelicals distance himself from this "loon"? Did he lose his job? Do you know why not? Because they support what he says.


Oh come on, if every religious person or institution has to condemn every nutcase who spells "God" the same, there'd be no time left to eat.


Do they need to? I'd like to know who supports what he says other than the people who are already considered part of that fringe. I don't. I don't know anybody who does.

It should not be necessary for any group to distance itself from extremists if it's fairly self-evident that the extremists are not considered part of the mainstream. The best is to let lunatics be. If you get into a mudfight with a pig, only the pig has fun, right?

If people considered a fringe guy to be mainstream, then that's a different situation. Then I'd step up and clarify. But I don't see that happening.


He's the pastor of one church. His bigoted redneck church supports him, and that's all he needs to keep his job. There is no other group that can "fire" him.


How dare you assume people here are Christian?

We actually have a brain.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: