Australian Prime Minister says, Faith-based political parties would 'undermine social cohesion'

[danieldemol]

Australia: Faith-based political parties would 'undermine social cohesion', prime minister says

'-Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says faith-based political parties would undermine social cohesion in Australia.

-His comments came after revelations that The Muslim Vote movement was planning to target federal Labor seats at the next election.

-The Muslim Vote denied it was a political party or religious campaign, but rather a political campaign that aimed to "educate and mobilise" its community on a grassroots level.'

Source: Faith-based political parties would 'undermine social cohesion', PM says

Although I understand and agree with the need to recognise Palestinian statehood, I understand that the Greens recognise it anyway, so starting a religious campaign to pit Muslim MPs against Labor MPs does sound like a theocratic take on Australian politics similar to that taken by the Christian Democratic Party in my view and I can see how this would increase ideas that Muslims stand against the values of the rest of us thus undermining social cohesion (although I admit to not knowing what PM Albanese had in mind when he made the comments).

Also doesn't it kind of advertise dishonesty to say one is not a religious campaign at the same time it attempts to mobilise a specifically religious community to vote for it? I mean the name - the "Muslim vote" movement kind of gives it way don't you think?

Thoughts?

 

[Lyndon]

Yet another stupid right wing policy by Albanese, who cares if Muslims run for Parliament, its their right as Australians

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think this quote from the article sums up a large part of the initiative pretty well:

"But ultimately, if you don't participate, and if you don't effectively flex to show the power of your vote, how will they ever take your vote seriously?"

For decades, mainstream political parties throughout much of the Western world have either brushed their contribution to abuse of Palestinians under the rug or have outright been supportive of and complicit in it. This has largely held true even for relatively liberal parties such as the Labor Party in Australia, the Democratic Party in the US, and, after Keir Starmer's reshaping, now also the Labour Party in the UK.

The Australian PM is criticizing the movement. What has his party offered the dissatisfied voters, then? When many voters, especially Muslim ones, perceive that parts of a given party's foreign policies have effectively treated the lives of their fellow Muslims as less important or even as disposable for many years, what kind of response does he expect from them? Perhaps he and his party could try to ask themselves and address these questions if they're worried about the resultant threat to social cohesion. As far as I can see, social cohesion is never a one-way street and requires mutual understanding and cooperation.

Mobilizing the votes of those who are dissatisfied with such policies and the contribution of their countries to a draconian, abusive status quo seems reasonable to me. The "Muslim Vote" movement is participating in the democratic process in a way meant to effect change and highlight the impact of their vote, so unless they're doing anything illegal or inciting, I don't see a major problem with this aside from the name of the initiative and its focus on Muslim voters rather than all voters who are supportive of Palestinian rights. I think that mixing religion and politics is a dangerous rabbit hole, and in this case, the explicitly religious overtones in the title and stated target audience of the initiative also seem to me counterproductive in that they may end up "othering" non-Muslim supporters of Palestinian rights instead of including them in the initiative—due to the apparent appeal to religion as the primary common factor among the movement's supporters. I also think it's worth noting that many Palestinians are Christians, after all, so the issue of Palestinian rights isn't only about Muslims either.

 

[danieldemol]

Yet another stupid right wing policy by Albanese, who cares if Muslims run for Parliament, its their right as Australians

The Australian Labor Party has Muslims in parliament (Ed Husic is one example, Fatima Payman was another before she left).

So no one is suggesting a policy preventing Muslims from running for parliament, they appear to simply be suggesting that although it is a right to do so, forming uniquely religious political parties will be divisive as has been observed by the formation of other religious parties such as the Christian Democrats, One Nation etc as such parties serve and represent the interests of only their religion typically in my view

 

[danieldemol]

I think that mixing religion and politics is a dangerous rabbit hole, and in this case, the explicitly religious overtones in the title and stated target audience of the initiative also seem to me counterproductive in that they may end up "othering" non-Muslim supporters of Palestinian rights instead of including them in the initiative—due to the apparent appeal to religion as the primary common factor among the movement's supporters. I also think it's worth noting that many Palestinians are Christians, after all, so the issue of Palestinian rights isn't only about Muslims either.

I think in your final paragraph you captured in extensive wording precisely the sentiment that Albanese is expressing, the Greens support Palestinian statehood as far as I'm aware so why a counter-productive religious party?

 

[Lyndon]

The Australian Labor Party has Muslims in parliament (Ed Husic is one example, Fatima Payman was another before she left).

So no one is suggesting a policy preventing Muslims from running for parliament, they appear to simply be suggesting that although it is a right to do so, forming uniquely religious political parties will be divisive as has been observed by the formation of other religious parties such as the Christian Democrats, One Nation etc as such parties serve and represent the interests of only their religion typically in my view

Obviously Labor is not representing the interests of Muslims, so they should rum their own.

 

[danieldemol]

Obviously Labor is not representing the interests of Muslims, so they should rum their own.

What specific policies do they want that are not already represented by the Greens?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think in your final paragraph you captured in extensive wording precisely the sentiment that Albanese is expressing, the Greens support Palestinian statehood as far as I'm aware so why a counter-productive religious party?

According to the article, they have emphasized that their movement isn't a political party:

In a statement on Thursday, The Muslim Vote denied it was a political party or religious campaign, but rather a political campaign that aimed to "educate and mobilise our community at the grassroots level".

I'm not sure why they're not aligning with the Greens instead, but perhaps they want more leeway to support independents or other candidates of their choosing. Also, if the movement includes a lot of conservative Muslims, I suspect that some of the Greens' stances on social issues may be too liberal for them, although your guess is as good as mine when it comes to whether these are their reasons for starting their own movement rather than just aligning with an existing party.

 

[LuisDantas]

It is dangerous to assume that Muslim perceptions of what is political and/or religious align with anyone else's.

Actually, it is dangerous to assume that about anyone. But for Muslims that is a significantly more true. It is, after all, the community that makes a point of frequently stating that there is no compulsion in religion even while insisting that their creed must be protected, allowed exceptions and lent prestige no matter what.

Yeah, I know some people don't like that I say that. But it is the truth.

I am not saying that their reservations are not sincere. I am saying instead that I don't trust their discernment, nor their goals.

It is never a good thing to allow for any form of belief-based exception for legal or political purposes.

 

[icehorse]

For decades, mainstream political parties throughout much of the Western world have either brushed their contribution to abuse of Palestinians under the rug or have outright been supportive of and complicit in it. This has largely held true even for relatively liberal parties such as the Labor Party in Australia, the Democratic Party in the US, and, after Keir Starmer's reshaping, now also the Labour Party in the UK.

The Australian PM is criticizing the movement. What has his party offered the dissatisfied voters, then? When many voters, especially Muslim ones, perceive that parts of a given party's foreign policies have effectively treated the lives of their fellow Muslims as less important or even as disposable for many years, what kind of response does he expect from them? Perhaps he and his party could try to ask themselves and address these questions if they're worried about the resultant threat to social cohesion. As far as I can see, social cohesion is never a one-way street and requires mutual understanding and cooperation.

Mobilizing the votes of those who are dissatisfied with such policies and the contribution of their countries to a draconian, abusive status quo seems reasonable to me. The "Muslim Vote" movement is participating in the democratic process in a way meant to effect change and highlight the impact of their vote, so unless they're doing anything illegal or inciting, I don't see a major problem with this aside from the name of the initiative and its focus on Muslim voters rather than all voters who are supportive of Palestinian rights. I think that mixing religion and politics is a dangerous rabbit hole, and in this case, the explicitly religious overtones in the title and stated target audience of the initiative also seem to me counterproductive in that they may end up "othering" non-Muslim supporters of Palestinian rights instead of including them in the initiative—due to the apparent appeal to religion as the primary common factor among the movement's supporters. I also think it's worth noting that many Palestinians are Christians, after all, so the issue of Palestinian rights isn't only about Muslims either.

I'm inferring that you think the "Muslim Vote Movement" is a one-issue organization? That issue being Palestine?

That doesn't sound correct to me. I suspect that might be one aspect, but I think this is an example of Islamists at work, and Islamists must be defeated.

 

[icehorse]

For decades, mainstream political parties throughout much of the Western world have either brushed their contribution to abuse of Palestinians under the rug or have outright been supportive of and complicit in it. This has largely held true even for relatively liberal parties such as the Labor Party in Australia, the Democratic Party in the US, and, after Keir Starmer's reshaping, now also the Labour Party in the UK.

The Australian PM is criticizing the movement. What has his party offered the dissatisfied voters, then? When many voters, especially Muslim ones, perceive that parts of a given party's foreign policies have effectively treated the lives of their fellow Muslims as less important or even as disposable for many years, what kind of response does he expect from them? Perhaps he and his party could try to ask themselves and address these questions if they're worried about the resultant threat to social cohesion. As far as I can see, social cohesion is never a one-way street and requires mutual understanding and cooperation.

Mobilizing the votes of those who are dissatisfied with such policies and the contribution of their countries to a draconian, abusive status quo seems reasonable to me. The "Muslim Vote" movement is participating in the democratic process in a way meant to effect change and highlight the impact of their vote, so unless they're doing anything illegal or inciting, I don't see a major problem with this aside from the name of the initiative and its focus on Muslim voters rather than all voters who are supportive of Palestinian rights. I think that mixing religion and politics is a dangerous rabbit hole, and in this case, the explicitly religious overtones in the title and stated target audience of the initiative also seem to me counterproductive in that they may end up "othering" non-Muslim supporters of Palestinian rights instead of including them in the initiative—due to the apparent appeal to religion as the primary common factor among the movement's supporters. I also think it's worth noting that many Palestinians are Christians, after all, so the issue of Palestinian rights isn't only about Muslims either.

I'm inferring that you think the "Muslim Vote Movement" is a one-issue organization? That issue being Palestine?

That doesn't sound correct to me. I suspect that might be one aspect, but I think this is an example of Islamists at work, and Islamists must be defeated.

 

[Madsaac]

Australia: Faith-based political parties would 'undermine social cohesion', prime minister says

'-Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says faith-based political parties would undermine social cohesion in Australia.

-His comments came after revelations that The Muslim Vote movement was planning to target federal Labor seats at the next election.

-The Muslim Vote denied it was a political party or religious campaign, but rather a political campaign that aimed to "educate and mobilise" its community on a grassroots level.'

Source: Faith-based political parties would 'undermine social cohesion', PM says

Although I understand and agree with the need to recognise Palestinian statehood, I understand that the Greens recognise it anyway, so starting a religious campaign to pit Muslim MPs against Labor MPs does sound like a theocratic take on Australian politics similar to that taken by the Christian Democratic Party in my view and I can see how this would increase ideas that Muslims stand against the values of the rest of us thus undermining social cohesion (although I admit to not knowing what PM Albanese had in mind when he made the comments).

Also doesn't it kind of advertise dishonesty to say one is not a religious campaign at the same time it attempts to mobilise a specifically religious community to vote for it? I mean the name - the "Muslim vote" movement kind of gives it way don't you think?

Thoughts?

I think he has a fair point. Muslims and other minority groups would be better to stand together within the Labor party because they will get a much better and fairer go then if they splintered into smaller groups. We need to move together as one.

If any political group was going to give Muslims a better deal then it's the Labor party.

And that's why Fatima Paymen should have a good look at herself and her actions, she was voted in as a Labor representative, so follow the Labor script or leave parliament

 

[Lyndon]

I think he has a fair point. Muslims and other minority groups would be better to stand together within the Labor party because they will get a much better and fairer go then if they splintered into smaller groups. We need to move together as one.

If any political group was going to give Muslims a better deal then it's the Labor party.

And that's why Fatima Paymen should have a good look at herself and her actions, she was voted in as a Labor representative, so follow the Labor script or leave parliament

What nonsense, a good go by kicking Fatima out of the party???

 

[Madsaac]

What nonsense, a good go by kicking Fatima out of the party???

She quit didn't she? Now an independent?

 

[Lyndon]

She quit didn't she? Now an independent?

she was forced out of the labor party

 

[Estro Felino]

I perfectly agree with him.
Secular state means secular state.

Separation of Church and State.

 

[Lyndon]

I perfectly agree with him.
Secular state means secular state.

Separation of Church and State.

Australia doesn't have seperation of church and state, they have Chaplains in public schools and religion classes, you're thinking of America which used to have seperation till your right wing friends got into power

 

[RestlessSoul]

I don’t think an organisation calling itself The Moslem Vote - which is also active in the U.K. btw - is going to do much for community cohesion in places with large, mostly immigrant, Muslim minorities.

But they are entitled to participate in the democratic process; I suspect they’ll find that their influence over their fellow Moslems won’t be that great, though they may ride the wave of strong feeling about Palestine as far as it takes them. Which may not be all that far.

 

[Madsaac]

she was forced out of the labor party

No she quit, they may have asked her to leave but she didn't have to quit, she could have said no.

And she knows if she did quit, she wouldn't have the opportunity of still being in the Senate, so what do you think of those actions? I think it's weak.

She should have made some rumblings within the party, and get some more on side but she decided to publicly side with the 'enemy'

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Australia: Faith-based political parties would 'undermine social cohesion', prime minister says

Why would that necessarily be the case?