When will it stop?

Status
Closed
Oct 2010
4,947
DC
#61
IDK, it seems that we do have different opinions.
Indeed we do, my friend.
I do not see terrorists as community's "bad apples". To me, terrorist are simply what they are: persons that are convinced the way to change society is by demolishing it through violent acts. To me, there is absolutely no difference between them in regard to what "community", "unity" they link to, they're linked to.
I can not agree with the above premise.

The community that hates its' bad apples claims "a wider conspiracy" using the "bad apples" to smear its' glories and pristine reputation (an Oxymoron).

The community in general is not part of the solution unless some of the solution includes "exceptions" and "exemptions" to "stop radical recruitment" , I am pretty sure there exists a good number of good members who are trying to help the issue at large but the community is not exactly represented by them nor in agreement with their premise, methods, or goals.

We are talking about a community that not only produces "bad apples" but also does not widely distance itself from "misogyny" and "antisemitism".

As for victimizing, appologizing, demonizing the said 'communities", unities, to me is another talk, it's another fight.
This is one reason why we have the differing opinions, it is the same fight. A community can not be called a victim if it shows a hostile and condescending attitude as it proclaims "victim-hood"

If I get beaten today for being too white, and tomorrow for not being enough white (*), it will not change anything to me: stupidity is universal, violence is universal.
The causes are not universal, again, our different opinions. Saying different ideologies do similar things is not the same as saying "one ideology does not" , this is relevant to this event.

(*) the "if" is just a figure of speech: it actually happened in my youth, both of them. It's maybe why to me stupidity, violence, terrorism, hasn't a distinct colour, nor a distinct ideology or religion./quote]
Generally speaking, of course not. Yet, that does not change what we are talking about, it is not an all or none analogy, all done by all, none done by none. Doing that means we talk about nothing.

Yet in this particular topic, violence, terrorism and bigotry has a unifying ideology shared by many.

As for the beating up, I fear the day I get found out for not being "Muslim" enough in this place; I do believe the ensuing discussion will that my attackers are not "Muslim" enough (or should we say Implants to ruin the community's reputation ;)) even though the community (who denies those attackers shared values) does in fact think I would have deserved the beating for being "offensive".
 
Oct 2013
13,852
Europix
#62
The causes are not universal, again, our different opinions. Saying different ideologies do similar things is not the same as saying "one ideology does not" , this is relevant to this event.
I disagree, as it isn't exactly what I was saying: terrorism has an approach of itself, that is identical, regardless the ideology/religion they embrace.

Maybe a blunt parallel will explain it: in my oppinion, Osama bin Laden, in 1910's Russia, would very likely have been a radical Bolshevik.

The community in general is not part of the solution unless some of the solution includes "exceptions" and "exemptions" to "stop radical recruitment" , I am pretty sure there exists a good number of good members who are trying to help the issue at large but the community is not exactly represented by them nor in agreement with their premise, methods, or goals.
The community is never part of the solution, actually.

The society can be a deterrent or an enhancer, but it isn't "the solution". All it can do is minimizing the risk of aparition of terrorism. But zero risk is inexistent.

If it would be, Brevik or Christchurch would have not existed.
 
Oct 2010
4,947
DC
#63
I disagree, as it isn't exactly what I was saying: terrorism has an approach of itself, that is identical, regardless the ideology/religion they embrace.

Maybe a blunt parallel will explain it: in my opinion, Osama bin Laden, in 1910's Russia, would very likely have been a radical Bolshevik.
Trust me, I am not misunderstanding you, I just do not agree and I have said why.
 
Dec 2018
75
Cheyenne
#65
Imagine the lack of compassion you have to have to murder babies.

I don't even believe in a god but my wife and I colored eggs with our son and hid them at least 3 separate times because he loved it so much. Imagine someone wanting to kill him for celebrating a holiday.
 
Likes: arkteia

arkteia

Ad Honorem
Nov 2012
4,722
Seattle
#66
I hope there are zero terrorist attacks commited by Jains. Indeed, may be the world's most peaceful religion.
Interestingly, as one dear, although never met in person (and now deceased), Jain friend has explained to me, Jains are allowed to kill if their lives or lives of their children are threatened. There is a deity, Ghantakarna, who, among other things, protects against home invasions. The way he is hung on the wall, his arrow is targeted at the entrance. So, even Jains are allowed to kill, but for a very good reason, protection.
Ghantakarna Mahavir - Wikipedia
 

arkteia

Ad Honorem
Nov 2012
4,722
Seattle
#67
I disagree, as it isn't exactly what I was saying: terrorism has an approach of itself, that is identical, regardless the ideology/religion they embrace.

Maybe a blunt parallel will explain it: in my oppinion, Osama bin Laden, in 1910's Russia, would very likely have been a radical Bolshevik.
Osama bin Laden would have been an early Russian terrorist, from "Narodnaya volya" of 1870es. A rich gentleman who would donate his money to the cause and blow up without any compassion for the vague idea of helping "the people".
 

arkteia

Ad Honorem
Nov 2012
4,722
Seattle
#68
IDK, it seems that we do have different opinions.

I do not see terrorists as community's "bad apples". To me, terrorist are simply what they are: persons that are convinced the way to change society is by demolishing it through violent acts. To me, there is absolutely no difference between them in regard to what "community", "unity" they link to, they're linked to.

As for victimizing, appologizing, demonizing the said 'communities", unities, to me is another talk, it's another fight.

If I get beaten today for being too white, and tomorrow for not being enough white (*), it will not change anything to me: stupidity is universal, violence is universal.

______
(*) the "if" is just a figure of speech: it actually happened in my youth, both of them. It's maybe why to me stupidity, violence, terrorism, hasn't a distinct colour, nor a distinct ideology or religion.

@deaf tuner , we all can be victims of individual violence, gang violence, but usually such acts are random and impulsive. We can be threatened, beaten, for being white, or not white, for our religion, or not, and most likely, we'll be mugged. It happens.

But when a religious group is targeted for a reason that is not impulsive at all, for own twisted belief, when it is scary to to out to celebrate, when one is told, "avoid big groups", then even people like me would say, "enough is enough".

Russian Orthodox Easter is next week. I wanted go to a Russian church - they have beautiful bells and wonderful Easter food, but now I am staying at home. They have achieved what they wanted to. It is fear, and you know what comes next after fear. For the first time in my life I thought, "good that there are enough men with guns here", although I know that guns are useless in terrorist attacks.

Also, it is coming closer to home. A person well-known in one community perished in that senseless attack. That family went to Sri Lanka to take care of the charity facility they were building there. Charity work. Good people. Why kill them?

How does Sri Lanka benefit from this barbarian, horrible act? The terrorists blew up explosives in two five-star hotels. How many tourists are now willing to go to Sri Lanka?
 

arkteia

Ad Honorem
Nov 2012
4,722
Seattle
#69
You can do that, I won't.

:)

I have different perspective and different expectations.

I will rephrase something else as well:

Either a community is one unit or its' not, if it is and it insists it is then it is responsible for its' bad apple, if it is not, let's ALL not talk about it as a UNIT in any context whatsoever, that is my offer.

If I ever get beaten up because of being a Muslim, I will refuse that community gaining "extras" or "sympathy".

I as Muslim myself, am done with their "individualizing" violence while "community"fying victimhood (national and international levels), that includes their detractors and defenders.
And if god forbid anyone here is assaulted for being a Muslim, I hope there will be enough people raising their voice in indignation without even knowing the victim. And not even because of the community. Because of lawlessness that hate crime implies.
 
Likes: Isleifson
Status
Closed