Talk:Nation of Islam

	This Cults related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Tone

Not sure if this is an "ok" tone or not. Also, I used "Black Man" as opposed to African American, and capped it because this is how the term is used in NOI literature. Should I put in more "real" facts, like the history? --Waiting for Godot 12:45, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Yes, real facts and history would be nice.--Bob^{bing up} 17:41, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

I read it a little while ago and the tone didn't bother me (then again, I'm white...) ... but, yes, I second Bob's encouragement that you/we add more, you know, facts and stuff. ħuman 17:46, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

That takes all the fun out of it. I had a graduate course for a semester on NOI, and I swear they are worse in some ways (not as violent in deed, but certinaly in thought and word) than groups like KKK. It's so hard to take them seriously and deal with thier actual eschatology and political impact and role of leadership when you are also dealing with people who think a mad scientist cause the evil disease "whiteness". Facts, these shall come. --Waiting for Godot 18:23, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, well, the beauty of adding facts is, if they are outrageous, they provide a new target for even more jokes! ħuman 18:59, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, but i put all the juicy facts there already. ;-) now it's just comments about teh year Elijah Mohammud founded it, and when Malcom X came, and the wonderds of a power hungry Minister Farkhan... But I'm on it! I knew there was a reason I kept my books from college, right? --97.118.80.70 19:29, 4 August 2008 (EDT) (grumble, forgot to log in again. --wfg)

Actually, it seems that after some flap over some anti-Semitic flap, Louis Farrakhan didmellow down his most extreme positions, so now he's not racist so much as somewhat crazy.

However, there is (actually, was) some dude named Khalid Muhammad who was more of a moonbat/wingnut than Farrakhan ever could have been. He collaborated with Public Enemy on their song "Night of the Living Baseheads" and on Ice Cube's albums Death Certificate and Lethal Injection, participating in the "Death"/"Birth" skits of the former album and the totally idiotic songs "Horny Lil' Devil" (Certificate) and "Cave Bitch" (Injection). However, the only thing he could be held responsible for concerning the song/skit "Black Korea" (also on Certificate) is that at that time Ice Cube was affiliated with NOI at the time (early '90s), and as such thought that said recording wasn't idiotic.

To get a full grasp on how idiotic Khalid Muhammad's beliefs could be, read his Wikipedia article. Also, he believes everything in paragraph 0.--24.233.129.15 (talk) 03:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)NadirY2Krational

Nation of Islam of today is not the original Nation

To give historical perspective on the nuttery of the Nation, the leadership devolved, when the founder died, to the son of Elijah Muhammad, Warith Din. Warith Din had studied classical Islam, in Egypt, I think, and did not agree with the weirdness established by his father, and his father knew it. Some have speculated that the whole mothership fantasy, etc., was made up to be attractive, and that what the son did was part of a plan from the beginning. If so, it worked.

The son, when he was acknowledged as leader, disbanded the Nation and encouraged members to affiliate as and with traditional Muslims. I remember walking into a Nation mosque in Tucson and being eagerly welcomed -- I'm obviously "white" -- right after that. They were just starting to learn.

Almost the entire Nation followed the son into the American Muslim Mission, the organization the son founded. What was left is really a fringe splinter group, led by Farrakhan. I.e, some like their religion nutty. --Abd (talk) 16:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd not heard of this one.

Belial regards white people as a "criminal race of devils who earned demonic prophesy foretold against them"[18] and encourages his followers to give them skin cancer by shaking hands with them.[19] He claims that white children are particularly susceptible to this, and can develop skin cancer if a black person so much as looks at them.[20]

I'm doomed. Not only have I shaken hands with lots of black people, I have a black daughter, though, technically, she's Ethiopian. She's from the south there, though, so she doesn't show the Semitic-Arab population traits. Looking at her, though, any American is going to say that she's black. Skin, lips, hair, etc. I.e, she's beautiful.

And then what about her sister, who is Han Chinese, apparently. Is that "white" or "black"? And can I keep my daughter from looking at me? How about I just accept it, I'm gonna die anyway, and she loves me. What a way to go! Loved to death. Except when she's angry. If looks could kill, I'd be dead already. But what about her school mates? Almost all are "white." She doesn't just shake hands, she kisses, she came from Ethiopia that way, taught her Chinese sister how to be affectionate (she was always sweet, but shy).

Does anyone take Belial seriously? Sometimes RationalWiki is giving nut cases -- or trolls -- like this free publicity. --Abd (talk) 17:01, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I get that you know everything there is to know about everything. It's a corner stone of NI theology. Godotoi, putain, genial, merci 17:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

No, I know more than most about a few narrow topics, where I have experience. And you?

I worked with many former Nation members as a prison chaplain serving a mostly black inmate population, I've served as imam a few times at mosques that used to be Nation mosques (in San Francisco, Oakland, and North Carolina), I heard the late Warith Din speak, and I also worked a bit, in prison, with current Nation "believers," (who were rare).

As I could be more than three times your age (maybe not, how old are you?), I might have more experience, that's all.

What you "get," here, is your own woo, made up. I'm assertive where I think I know something, especially from my own experience, but certainly fallible even there. Sometimes. --Abd (talk) 18:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

"your own woo, made up" = "you said something I disagree with", yes? also, I bet you're fun at parties. Sophie^{because liberals} 18:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

No, that's not equivalent. Something was said that I know is an error, it's not mere disagreement, because the writer is blatantly clueless on the topic, the statement is obviously literally false, and sarcastically implies something that is also misleading, and so I speculated on the origin of this unreasonable statement, a reasonable speculation. On RationalWiki, I understand, we are allowed to pretend that we know something that is actually a matter of interpretation, not fact, per se, right?

(I can also assert how the statement is true. It's true as a loose expression of WfG's impression, but the implication of a connection with some alleged "NoI theology" is polemic fluff.)

As to parties, you think I write like I'd talk at a party, where I can see the eyes and faces of those listening, as well as identify those who aren't listening? Do you imagine that I'd continue speaking if nobody were listening? That I would not respond to those who were actually present and listening?

I'm a public speaker, Sophie, and I'm damn good at it. I see this and know this, because I interact with people, face-to-face, all the time, in small groups and large meetings, when I'm not editing this damn wiki or being otherwise distracted.

I suspect that you, as well, have made something up.

"Russianalwiki,"[1] though, I thought was great, except I keep reading it as "Russi-anal-wiki," whereas I think you meant "Russian-al-wiki." Just what's so.

Give me a few minutes at a party, you'd probably be ROTFL. Depends somewhat, though, on what you are like at parties. Most wiki editors are socially fairly dim, from my experience with the Wikipedia community and a WikiConference. Maybe this community is different, but I rather doubt it. --Abd (talk) 18:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

HE clearly is. I can bring out my credentials, but like i said, this particular topic of the illness of the white devil is a cornerstone of NOI theology. As you said, you know people today, who are from a new branch of NOI. The foundations upon which this article is built, the position of NOI members on this topic comes predominately from academics. You seem as a position, to challenge everything that is accepted by academics. you do it here, you do it in cold fusion, you do it in diets. You like "what I know and is in my gut", which I suppose is fine. I like "what I read in journal articles from pup med, JAAR, JIS, JMIS. IT's a very different perspective, and yes, I tend to go with academics, perhaps too blindly. But it's how i think it's best to work. Godotoi, putain, genial, merci 18:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that's what you were on about. The "illness of the white devil" is certainly part of NoI "theology," but that wasn't literally what you wrote. The "It" was undefined by you, so I misinterpreted it. The extreme, over-the-top woo from Elohim Belial is not at all fundamental to the NoI, as an extreme taken to an extreme. And, no, I'm not challenging what is academic consensus, the opposite. I'm challenging what is pop-rational-skepticism-opinion, when it differs either from what I personally know (as here, I haven't read what academic consensus is on the NoI stuff) or where I'm familiar with the academic literature, more familiar than any RW know-it-all who has appeared so far (that's low-carb and cold fusion). Those are fields where academics have long disagreed, and, in both cases, where academic consensus has in recent years taken a major turn toward positions that editors here largely think is "woo" or "pseudoscience." And those are better discussed at the relevant talk pages, Talk:Low-carb diet and Talk:Cold fusion. --Abd (talk) 19:01, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, that section really shouldn't be there. Elohim Belial and God Damn America are part of Yakub Islam - as that group has its own article, and is probably a hoax, I'm removing it. Balaam (talk) 18:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Whether or not Yakub Islam is a hoax, and I agree it might be, it's certainly of very little relevance to the Nation of Islam, even if it takes certain NoI ideas to preposterous-upon-preposterous extremes. In an article on dogs, would we give major prominence to rabies? --Abd (talk) 19:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

...unfinished edit comment re: removing stuff.

The NoI predates the modern Civil Rights movement, Black Power and Scientology by at least 20 years. Its roots are closer to the black nationalism of the Garveyites or the African Blood Brotherhood, as well as other early 20th century Afrocentric movements than what was listed. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 20:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Scientology

It's official by now that the NOI and Scientology are more or less one. Have fun! --Raysenn ^{Get the paddles, he's having a cancer!} 19:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Anti-semitism

A bit more detail about their anti-semitism (and other prejudices, e.g. claimed anti-Catholicism) would seem to fit RW's purpose. There's some sources that aren't crazy right-wing anti-black racist fanatics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_of_Islam_and_antisemitism https://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/when-malcolm-x-met-the-nazis-0000620-v22n4 http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/adl/nation-of-islam/noi-01.html Annquin (talk) 14:16, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Million Man March

How come there's no mention of the Nation of Islam's organization of this progressive protest? 96.234.147.69 (talk) 01:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Socio-economic influence and legitimacy

There are many things I wish to expand on that I do not believe will fit into the main page regarding the Nation of Islam. However, I feel the most important thing to remember regarding the NOI is how often they will use bait and switch tactics as well as red herrings and adhering to many pseudoscientific positions and woo to come off as legitimate. They have many scholars such as Dr.Wesley Muhammad who is has received in Islamic studies try to pass off his crank position of the COVID-19 vaccine. The Nation of Islam is also engage heavily pseudo-historical revisionism and racialism often leaning into conspiracy theory territory What I also find disturbing is the amount of books published by them and how well they have sold in the black community. Books like “How white folks got so rich” have some elements of truth such as how the GI bill after WW2 only gave housing benefits to white veterans and not black veterans. However, use a bait and switch and throws in antiemetic dog whistles and adheres to their racialist ideology of whites and Jews being “deceivers”. SensaurC-137 (talk) 19:27, 30 January 2021 (UTC)