|
Obdicut posted:A shitload of scholarly works, and you're right 'normal' is dumb. I mean political and secular, rather than simply 'god wants me to'. I'm not saying that there aren't other causes for their behavior, but I think its also irresponsible to ignore how much impact religions DO have on behavior. Even if you're right that its secular reasons, if the people themselves are doing it for what THEY consider to be religious reasons, doesn't it stand that we should address those religious reasons?
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
Jastiger posted:I'm not saying that there aren't other causes for their behavior, but I think its also irresponsible to ignore how much impact religions DO have on behavior. Even if you're right that its secular reasons, if the people themselves are doing it for what THEY consider to be religious reasons, doesn't it stand that we should address those religious reasons? What you said makes no sense in the context of these works. As usual, you're just talking about poo poo you're totally ignorant about. For one thing, the people aren't doing it for what they consider to be religious reasons, but political ones, is one of the main themes that's found throughout. So go ahead, actually challenge yourself and read a book.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:What you said makes no sense in the context of these works. As usual, you're just talking about poo poo you're totally ignorant about. For one thing, the people aren't doing it for what they consider to be religious reasons, but political ones, is one of the main themes that's found throughout. So go ahead, actually challenge yourself and read a book. So when people claims to say, blow up abortion clincs in the name of god or self destruct themselves with shouts of "Allahu Akbar", it isn't religious at all, its purely political? For them?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:So when people claims to say, blow up abortion clincs in the name of god or self destruct themselves with shouts of "Allahu Akbar", it isn't religious at all, its purely political? For them? Does that book say that? This is the best single-source one, remember: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46293362_Democracy_and_Terrorism#page=130 It's all freely available right there, and it's well-written.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Does that book say that? This is the best single-source one, remember: I wasn't disputing the books, they're likely good pieces of literature. It just sounded like you'd be rushing in "whoa whoa whoa, buddy, you're not REALLY blowing yourself up for Allah. You see, there are a myriad of political, cultural, economic, and social issues that have led up to you even considering Allah! Therefor, you're not REALLY doing this in the name of religion. Now please turn to page 35 of the selected works so we can go over your regions history and really drill down here" *tosses aside Koran* "See, it wasn't because of Islam!" Granted thats hyperbole, but I was pointing out that you can't just stiff arm the "did they do it for religion" question which it sounded like you were willing to do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I wasn't disputing the books, they're likely good pieces of literature. You were, actually. You'd know this if you read it. Why don't you? You're interested in the subject, right? Why not spend the time reading a well-argued and sourced book?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
I'm reading the Bad Jesus right now. No time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I wasn't disputing the books, they're likely good pieces of literature. Yes. People are often blind to the societal, political, and economic forces that affect their decision making.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:
this rocks, thanks
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I'm reading the Bad Jesus right now. No time. So basically, you don't have time to learn about the subject, but you do have time to talk about it. Zas posted:this rocks, thanks The book is really good, too. There's another one that goes into the 'sacred values' thing deeper, but I can't find it. That paper makes the argument that vengeance is the 'original' sacred value, that some idea of 'balancing' or 'mirroring' is one of the main human motivations and we don't really have a word for it. We call it vengeance and justice and vindication and lots of other words, but for the central emotion that powers it, we don't really have a name.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Would 'destiny' work?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Cracker King posted:Would 'destiny' work? I don't think so, because it doesn't depend on an idea that things are 'supposed' to be a certain way, it's a weird idea of equilibrium that we need to achieve by wild, savage swings of a pendulum.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Lame Devil posted:Yes. People are often blind to the societal, political, and economic forces that affect their decision making. I agree, but I thought we didn't want to be in the business of defining peoples motivations for them, thus the Islamophobia topic. I Think its a tough issue for sure. Obdicut posted:So basically, you don't have time to learn about the subject, but you do have time to talk about it. Pretty much
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Pretty much At least he's honest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Someone mentioned the Thirty Years War several pages ago. It's worth noting that this war was actually a proxy war for a dynastic conflict between the Bourbon (French) and Hapsburg (Spanish and Austrian) monarchies. The situation with Germany in that war closely mirrors Iraq and Afghanistan today. In all of these cases, external intervention (French and Swedish for Germany, Soviet and American for Afghanistan, just American for Iraq) undermined the countries legitimate secular power structures. With central secular power de-legitimized, social order rests on religion because it is the next biggest piece of society. If it were then possible to totally de-legitimize religion, then rather than seeing paradise emerge as everyone abandons magical thinking, you instead see society seize hold of the next biggest source of authority. At each stage of this disintegration, a society manifests social friction as violence. As a society is forced to rely on less universal sources of authority for its organization, more people die. If you smite Leviathan, Popes and Ayatollahs fill its place. If you smite Popes and Ayatollahs, there are geographical and customary associations and then varying degrees of kinship ties that are all that sits between any society and a return to a Hobbesian war of all against all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Cracker King posted:Would 'destiny' work? Let's call it the motive of némein: "to give what is due." It's not so much the traditional conception of "destiny" (as in, a thing that is meant to happen), but more a sense of repaying acts in kind. When someone does good to us (or a proxy of our identity, such as our society, our religion, etc.), we feel motivated to do good back to them; when someone does evil to us, we feel motivated to strike back with evil deeds in turn.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
Have some more fun Islamophobic over-reaction: http://www.salon.com/2015/12/18/its_the_clock_kid_all_over_again_a_12_year_old_sikh_boy_is_the_latest_victim_of_racist_terrorism_paranoia/ I'm guessing all these Americans who are frightened of Sikhs would be simply paralyzed by fear if they ever visited Toronto or Vancouver.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
As the parent of a now 10 day old child if I wrote down a list of the 100 things that concern me most about her future the direct threat of terrorism or Islam would not be on it. We could have another 911 tomorrow and that would remain true. Terrorism isn't a real threat to Americans. Period. It's a nuance. It's going to continue to exist and it's going to continue to kill people. But statistically it doesn't register as a relevant threat. Note that this opinion isn't based on any whitewashing of actual existing terrorists. They're evil and deserve to die and it doesn't bother me that we kill them with drones and bombs (the practicality of that as a policy is a separate debatable issue). But they're weak. If they were strong they'd be attacking us directly with actual military resources but they're not so they resort terrorism out of necessity. That's what terrorism is - inherently weak. The republican rhetoric which elevates it to the level of a primary issue might as well be declaring that the sky is purple. It's wrong, dangerous and disturbing at every level. It's also self-defeating and inconsistent. If they're actually a threat then they're strong or we're weak. Neither should be true and our reaction to their acts is exactly what they want. Measured and thoughtful response to a threat is the strong response and obviously the one we should be taking. That the current [over]reaction is being driven by a fearful, ageing, declining demographic is no surprise. Let's hope for their quick death and decline. They're the threat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:As the parent of a now 10 day old child if I wrote down a list of the 100 things that concern me most about her future the direct threat of terrorism or Islam would not be on it. We could have another 911 tomorrow and that would remain true. I forget the quote but it goes something like: For Fascists the enemy must be both strong and weak. Legion yet scattered. Ineffective yet fear inducing. Thats how you get yourself elected, by painting a schizophrenic view of your enemy in order to get people upset and worked up about it. Maybe it was 1984 or something?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I forget the quote but it goes something like: For Fascists the enemy must be both strong and weak. Legion yet scattered. Ineffective yet fear inducing. Thats how you get yourself elected, by painting a schizophrenic view of your enemy in order to get people upset and worked up about it. Umberto Eco.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Have some more fun Islamophobic over-reaction: Part of fighting terrorist is to ignore them. Terrorist are like "internet trolls" and do it for the mass media attention. When you do "a scare" like this principal and the police, you are helping the political agenda of the terrorist. The principal and the police here helped the terrorist agenda, without the intervention of the terrorist. Is pretty dumb, and useless. This is not about ignoring any warning. But about correct reply and balance. Tei fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Tei posted:Part of fighting terrorist is to ignore them. Terrorist are like "internet trolls" and do it for the mass media attention. Finally something I actually agree with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
Tei posted:Part of fighting terrorist is to ignore them. Terrorist are like "internet trolls" and do it for the mass media attention. Except the correct response was literally nothing, because it was a 12 year old child with a backpack that had an integrated cellphone charger. It's not a matter of ignoring terrorists (though your point is correct in general), it's a matter of acting like you have some semblance of a functioning brain. They put this kid in juvenile detention for 3 days. I don't see how you could have made a less rational response to the situation than that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Except the correct response was literally nothing, because it was a 12 year old child with a backpack that had an integrated cellphone charger. It's not a matter of ignoring terrorists (though your point is correct in general), it's a matter of acting like you have some semblance of a functioning brain. They put this kid in juvenile detention for 3 days. I don't see how you could have made a less rational response to the situation than that. The kid had a heart condition so it's lucky they didn't tazer him. What the gently caress is wrong with the police?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:The kid had a heart condition so it's lucky they didn't tazer him. Between the police, the juvenile detention people, and everyone at the school, it's amazing that not a single person went "HEY! GUYS! THIS IS ABSOLUTELY hosed AND YOU'RE ALL CRAZY!" How can so many people all be so completely moronic?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Between the police, the juvenile detention people, and everyone at the school, it's amazing that not a single person went "HEY! GUYS! THIS IS ABSOLUTELY hosed AND YOU'RE ALL CRAZY!" If you're in a position of authority at a school and dismiss a threat as "eh, it's probably nothing" and ignore it or turn it away with only a cursory investigation, and it turns out to be something serious, people could possibly be injured or killed and you and your organization will definitely get your pants sued off. If you treat it seriously and it turns out to be nothing, you've inconvenienced some people and can blame the whole thing on someone else. It's the reason stuff like swatting works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:If you're in a position of authority at a school and dismiss a threat as "eh, it's probably nothing" and ignore it or turn it away with only a cursory investigation, and it turns out to be something serious, people could possibly be injured or killed and you and your organization will definitely get your pants sued off. If you treat it seriously and it turns out to be nothing, you've inconvenienced some people and can blame the whole thing on someone else. It's the reason stuff like swatting works. The fancy name for this is 'regret analysis' and it's the worst kind of decision-making but unfortunately dominant because most systems hang people out to dry if they gently caress up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:The fancy name for this is 'regret analysis' and it's the worst kind of decision-making but unfortunately dominant because most systems hang people out to dry if they gently caress up. What kind of legislation would help alleviate this end of the problem? The other end of course being the absolutely insane police response of holding a child for three days without informing the parents.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:If you're in a position of authority at a school and dismiss a threat as "eh, it's probably nothing" and ignore it or turn it away with only a cursory investigation, and it turns out to be something serious, people could possibly be injured or killed and you and your organization will definitely get your pants sued off. If you treat it seriously and it turns out to be nothing, you've inconvenienced some people and can blame the whole thing on someone else. It's the reason stuff like swatting works. I agree. I think it also comes from an uncertainty of who bears the burden of investigation. Is it the teacher's responsibility to check the veracity of claim? Or the principal's? Or the police's? In this situation it seems the teacher should have looked at the bag to understand the misunderstanding, but I wouldn't place the burden of investigation on the teacher if the claimed bomb was inside the student's locker. When confronted with a serious task, without clear authority to resolve it, people report up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
As an aside, why do western countries use ISIS instead of Daesh to refer to the eponymous group? It seems weird considering it's already a formal practice to refer to Burma as "formerly known as Myanmar" as to show the military coup's illegitimacy, why not do the same for ISIS/Daesh?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:As an aside, why do western countries use ISIS instead of Daesh to refer to the eponymous group? It seems weird considering it's already a formal practice to refer to Burma as "formerly known as Myanmar" as to show the military coup's illegitimacy, why not do the same for ISIS/Daesh? It could be any number of reasons; a lack of clarity to people who don't get understand the label (and having to explain it), the unexplained shift in language used, or most likely, the potential for undermining the threat (supposed or real) of the group by lampooning them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Chocolate Teapot posted:It could be any number of reasons; a lack of clarity to people who don't get understand the label (and having to explain it), the unexplained shift in language used, or most likely, the potential for undermining the threat (supposed or real) of the group by lampooning them. But wouldn't lampooning them by better than outright calling them "the Islamic State"? The latter only seems to rile up more Islamophobic hate crimes as people continue to see Muslims as a Fifth Column of said State.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:But wouldn't lampooning them by better than outright calling them "the Islamic State"? The latter only seems to rile up more Islamophobic hate crimes as people continue to see Muslims as a Fifth Column of said State. "the islamic state" seems far too respectful for ISIS. The Swedish newspapers use Islamic State for reasons unknown, and it irks me to no end.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
I think NPR goes with "the group calling itself the Islamic State" sometimes, so you can be sure that's the pentagon backchannel-approved formulation. e: also, cute backhanded refusals to call a group by its name have more punch when you actually stand a chance of defeating them. woke wedding drone fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Dec 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I think NPR goes with "the group calling itself the Islamic State" sometimes, so you can be sure that's the pentagon backchannel-approved formulation.  I mean, it's not like Mosul or even Raqqa is under threat, but they ain't exactly winning on either Iraqi front or Syrian Kurdistan, even with just our current modest air support and "whoops guess another truckful of guns fell off a plane".I'd totally likea more commonly recognizable term than Daesh - or alternatively, for Daesh to become English-standard. Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 03:11 on Dec 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
Is there a site keeping track of the various mosques getting arsoned in the US lately?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Speaking of bombs 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
Original source bmw.blog Did this even happen? It says it happened in melbourne but I havent heard anything about it. e: clashdaily  quote:3 BLACK THUGETTES Find Poor White Man And Beat Him To DEATH Lmao what is wrong with you, troika? SMILLENNIALSMILLEN fucked around with this message at 09:21 on Dec 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 09:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:As an aside, why do western countries use ISIS instead of Daesh to refer to the eponymous group? It seems weird considering it's already a formal practice to refer to Burma as "formerly known as Myanmar" as to show the military coup's illegitimacy, why not do the same for ISIS/Daesh? ISIS/ISIL and Da'esh have the exact same meaning. Bickering about dumb acronyms is completely a non-question in my opinion and I doubt ISIS cares either way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 13:36
|
|
