this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2020
0 points (NaN% liked)

main

15565 readers
14 users here now

THE MAIN RULE: ALL TEXT POSTS MUST CONTAIN "MAIN" OR BE ENTIRELY IMAGES (INLINE OR EMOJI)

(Temporary moratorium on main rule to encourage more posting on main. We reserve the right to arbitrarily enforce it whenever we wish and the right to strike this line and enforce mainposting with zero notification to the users because its funny)

A hexbear.net commainity. Main sure to subscribe to other communities as well. Your feed will become the Lion's Main!

Top Image of the Month will remain the Banner for a Month

Good comrades mainly sort posts by hot and comments by new!


gun-unity State-by-state guide on maintaining firearm ownership

guaido Domain guide on mutual aid and foodbank resources

smoker-on-the-balcony Tips for looking at financials of non-profits (How to donate amainly)

frothingfash Community-sourced megapost on the main media sources to radicalize libs and chuds with

just-a-theory An Amainzing Organizing Story

feminism Main Source for Feminism for Babies

data-revolutionary Maintaining OpSec / Data Spring Cleaning guide


ussr-cry Remain up to date on what time is it in Moscow

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I get why they did it, but it feels like something is lost as a result.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago)

There's a chance it's for the better.

spoilerIn the book, Paul does everything he can to avoid the jihad he sees coming, because jihad = religious fanaticism = bad. A crusade is also religious fanaticism and is also bad, but portraying the term "crusade" as an evil to be avoided could be a good thing for an American audience. Crusades are a part of Christian culture, and if you're going to write religious criticism there's less of a risk of it being misinterpreted if you use the audience's dominant religion as an example. If you criticize religious fanaticism using the religion of the Other, it's easy to interpret that as nothing more than "Other bad."

Plus, we're almost guaranteed to get some Christian chuds throwing a fit over it, especially with the rise of right-wing "crusade" imagery. That's always good for a laugh.

Spoilers for a book that came out half a century ago, I guess.