Blow The Bastards Up
I haven't read Chris' stuff completely, but I'm pretty sure I get his message, killing innocent people is wrong, maybe even anything terrorists do is wrong. I would agree with the innocent part. Also, I can't read the comments from here in Red China, so who knows what the discussion there is all about. Also also, there was that book that came out last year, I think, haven't read it yet but want to, called something like The Strategic Logic of Suicide Bombers or something, by some Chicago professor who's catalogued every suicide attack in the past few decades or some similar time frame. I think he says that most terrorism is what I’m saying below, within a country, one minority group versus the ruling majority.
Anyway, here's a recent thought that crossed my mind, especially after going to Sri Lanka. Most terrorism has not been what the USofA is dealing with. It's been intranational, one against one, usually the minority taking on the majority. I don't know all of them, but those that come to mind are the Basque campaign against Spain, IRA against the British, Palestinians against Israel, and my own personal favorite, Tamils in Sri Lanka. According to the aforementioned book, the Tamil organization leads the way in the number of suicide attacks, though these have almost always been at government targets. So most terrorism revolves around a majority-minority nation where the minority feels oppressed by the majority. I say, if the minority is correct in feeling this way, that they truly are oppressed by the majority, go ahead and blow up women and children. Why? Because if the minority is truly oppressed by the majority, then everyone in the majority who does not speak out against the oppression implicitly condones it. Even if they say they feel for the minority, if they continue to elect officials who propagate the oppression, they are just as guilty.
For instance, I know very little of the situation, but I cannot see an enlightened European democracy such as Spain oppressing a minority segment of their population. Maybe under Franco's fascist regime, but that came to an end in the 1970s and Spain's democracy has survived. Both Catalans and Basques are very anti-Madrid, and both have had voices calling for greater autonomy, even independence. But I find it hard to believe that the Basque terrorists' claims are justified by their actions. I also do not know about the IRA in Northern Ireland, although I could see Catholics being severely discriminated against, but enough to plant bombs? The same is true in Sri Lanka. The Tamils claim discrimination, and there were discriminatory laws on the books, don't know if they are still there. But my family hasn't really been hurt, or if they have, they’ve come out of it fine in the end, so how true are the claims? But if any of the claims are true, then I think that these innocent victims are not so innocent because of their implicit acceptance of the way their society functions. If one group is oppressing another, no one in the oppressing group is innocent if they are not pressuring for change. Does that make sense? And I'm not going to get into the actual word terrorist and how loaded it is, but it seems like every country in the world that is having some issue with a segment of the population has decided to brand that segment terrorists. The more I hear it, the more desensitized I become to all this terrorism.
Oh, and why children? I think society dictates how we think more than anything, what we feel is right and wrong, whatever, especially in the societies I've described above. I say blow up the little uns because chances are those little uns are going to grow up into willing participants of the oppressive society. Sure there is a chance one kid might become an activist and fight for the minority, but I have no problem believing most will not.
Anyway, here's a recent thought that crossed my mind, especially after going to Sri Lanka. Most terrorism has not been what the USofA is dealing with. It's been intranational, one against one, usually the minority taking on the majority. I don't know all of them, but those that come to mind are the Basque campaign against Spain, IRA against the British, Palestinians against Israel, and my own personal favorite, Tamils in Sri Lanka. According to the aforementioned book, the Tamil organization leads the way in the number of suicide attacks, though these have almost always been at government targets. So most terrorism revolves around a majority-minority nation where the minority feels oppressed by the majority. I say, if the minority is correct in feeling this way, that they truly are oppressed by the majority, go ahead and blow up women and children. Why? Because if the minority is truly oppressed by the majority, then everyone in the majority who does not speak out against the oppression implicitly condones it. Even if they say they feel for the minority, if they continue to elect officials who propagate the oppression, they are just as guilty.
For instance, I know very little of the situation, but I cannot see an enlightened European democracy such as Spain oppressing a minority segment of their population. Maybe under Franco's fascist regime, but that came to an end in the 1970s and Spain's democracy has survived. Both Catalans and Basques are very anti-Madrid, and both have had voices calling for greater autonomy, even independence. But I find it hard to believe that the Basque terrorists' claims are justified by their actions. I also do not know about the IRA in Northern Ireland, although I could see Catholics being severely discriminated against, but enough to plant bombs? The same is true in Sri Lanka. The Tamils claim discrimination, and there were discriminatory laws on the books, don't know if they are still there. But my family hasn't really been hurt, or if they have, they’ve come out of it fine in the end, so how true are the claims? But if any of the claims are true, then I think that these innocent victims are not so innocent because of their implicit acceptance of the way their society functions. If one group is oppressing another, no one in the oppressing group is innocent if they are not pressuring for change. Does that make sense? And I'm not going to get into the actual word terrorist and how loaded it is, but it seems like every country in the world that is having some issue with a segment of the population has decided to brand that segment terrorists. The more I hear it, the more desensitized I become to all this terrorism.
Oh, and why children? I think society dictates how we think more than anything, what we feel is right and wrong, whatever, especially in the societies I've described above. I say blow up the little uns because chances are those little uns are going to grow up into willing participants of the oppressive society. Sure there is a chance one kid might become an activist and fight for the minority, but I have no problem believing most will not.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home