The satanic teddies

[Gorgon]

I don't feel I have to apologise to anyone if I state that the people who initiate these protests, and the practice of muslim law in Saudi is wrong on so many levels. That may actually be discrimination, if it is it's discrimination against a sub set of a much larger group of people. Same as saying, for instance, that Osama Bin Laden deserves to be hunted down and killed.

 

I should hope we are all adult enough to know that not all countries with muslim population practice law like they do in saudi, or make any broad sweeping statements about Islam based on the worst it has to offer.

[Tale]

Totally, that's what i'm saying. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

 

Of course, anyone with half a brain already knows that.

So, what you're basically saying is that "nobody can be expected to behave in any way other than the manner most befitting of an absolute jackass."

[Pidesco]

And he's right, too.

[Nick_i_am]

That's part of it, the point is more that i'm saying that while the behaviour is never justified, the thought processes behind it are, to an extent.

 

But again, this is totally ignoring the unwashed masses and those with their own political agenda, for which the door still swings both ways.

 

What i'm saying is that 'the west' is as much to blame for this behaviour as anyone else, and saying that 'they'll get over it in 100 years or so', while being true on one level, doesn't address the whole problem.

 

Some people, for example, feel that their culture itself is under attack from 'western assimilation', which can provoke nationalistic pride.

[Tale]

That's part of it, the point is more that i'm saying that while the behaviour is never justified, the thought processes behind it are, to an extent.

 

But again, this is totally ignoring the unwashed masses and those with their own political agenda, for which the door still swings both ways.

 

What i'm saying is that 'the west' is as much to blame for this behaviour as anyone else, and saying that 'they'll get over it in 100 years or so', while being true on one level, doesn't address the whole problem.

 

Some people, for example, feel that their culture itself is under attack from 'western assimilation', which can provoke nationalistic pride.

Again, the door swings both ways. An idiot who feels he's under attack by a foreigner, so his reaction is to overreact against foreigners. The question is who am I talking about? Westerners or Muslims? You're shifting blame into an endless cycle. It's the West's fault that these Muslims are idiots. It's these Muslim idiots' (note: not saying all Muslims are idiots, I'm speaking in context) fault that the West persecutes them.

 

Sounds an awful lot like shifting the blame. Which is quite often the athithesis of addressing problems.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Tale

[Nick_i_am]

So where does the blame truely lie then? And who says that it's only idiots who feel under attack? THATS my point, it's the idiots who are raging, it's NOT just the idiots who feel like they're under attack, because one way or another, they are.

 

This is even ignoring the wars in Afganistan and Iraq along with Israil.

 

Of course, this is just the hot topic at the moment anyway, after communism, now extremist islam. How long before it's China or Korea again? In each case there's only a few common features, and yet, i'm 'shifting blame'.

 

We probably agree that education would be a big part of sorting this scenario out, my posts were aimed at those who feel that there is nothing wrong, and that they're being 'attacked' for no justifiable reason, which, on both sides, is simply not true.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Nick_i_am

[Tale]

So where does the blame truely lie then?

Blame only applies to direct actions. When you speak of accessory causes, you no longer have the right to even speak of "blame." Stop the pointing of fingers, it does nothing to promote understanding and solutions at that stage.

 

And who says that it's only idiots who feel under attack? THATS my point, it's the idiots who are raging, it's NOT just the idiots who feel like they're under attack, because one way or another, they are.

And who says that it's the entire West that is persecuting? THATS my point, it's some of the West who persecute, it's NOT all of the West, because I'm not doing jack and I'm part of the West. That schoolteacher didn't do anything either.

 

Of course, this is just the hot topic at the moment anyway, after communism, now extremist islam. How long before it's China or Korea again? In each case there's only a few common features, and yet, i'm 'shifting blame'.

You're trying to excuse idiotic actions of some by blaming someone else, yes, you're 'shifting blame.' Edited December 3, 2007 by Tale

[Nick_i_am]

If your only point is 'it's not the ENTIRE west, i'm just a normal person who doesn't hate islam!' then well done, have a medal, you apparently have at least half a brain.

 

Otherwise you just seem to be making sweeping statements that reflect little on what i've been saying, considering that my advocation has not been blame.

 

After all, how is 'violence is NEVER justified' translated as 'You're trying to excuse idiotic actions'?

 

As for blame only applying to direct actions, what the hell does that even mean in this case, and what fingers am I pointing at which people for which 'accessory causes'? More so, opinions on what's an 'accessory cause' could be part of the problem relating to 'the wests' attitude to this situation for all you know, so your 'arguments' seem friveless.

[Tale]

my advocation has not been blame.

Bunk.

What i'm saying is that 'the west' is as much to blame for this behaviour as anyone else

 

After all, how is 'violence is NEVER justified' translated as 'You're trying to excuse idiotic actions'?

Perhaps you're not trying to excuse it, it just that your argument is very typical of such an argument. That's the entire point of "blame." Which you say you're not advocating, despite it being so critical to the meaning of your thesis.

 

 

As for blame only applying to direct actions, what the hell does that even mean in this case,

People who act like idiots are to blame for themselves acting like idiots.

and what fingers am I pointing at which people for which 'accessory causes'?

The finger of blame is being pointed at "the west" for the climate that encourages the people who want a schoolteacher to be shot for putting forth that a schoolteacher should be shot.

 

More so, opinions on what's an 'accessory cause' could be part of the problem relating to 'the wests' attitude to this situation for all you know, so your 'arguments' seem friveless.

Anything beyond "person->action" or direct coersion (gun to the head) is an accessory cause. They're things that contribute, but are not the final deciding matter.

 

 

If you gave a crap about understanding, you wouldn't have brought up the word "blame" in the first place. Let alone levelled the finger of it at anyone other than the people who were behaving in a manner displeasant. But, if your advocation is not to blame, maybe you didn't mean it when you said it.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Tale

[Nick_i_am]

Sorry, but that's the entire point of what i'm getting at, saying that 'they're the ones blowing people up, so THEY'RE the bad guys' is exactly the problem, it's not just 'an enviroment', and if you belive that it is, then it's proof of the problem.

 

as for 'blame', I meant, advocating blame for any particular party above another, which isn't advocating blame, it's advocating understanding, esspesally when i'm talking about my own 'side'.

 

Also, you are saying that 'idiots' have themselves to blame for being violent, and not their lack of education, culture or any of the other factors present. Who's pointing fingers? Think about what you're saying before you get on your high-horse and start talking about 'truely caring about understanding'.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Nick_i_am

[Tale]

Sorry, but that's the entire point of what i'm getting at, saying that 'they're the ones blowing people up, so THEY'RE the bad guys' is exactly the problem, it's not just 'an enviroment', and if you belive that it is, then it's proof of the problem.

Do you even know what this thread is about? These aren't people who believe they're rebelling against a great invasive evil. They were wanting a schoolteacher to be shot because she listened to a harmless suggestion from a group of muslim students.

 

as for 'blame', I meant, advocating blame for any particular party above another, which isn't advocating blame, it's advocating understanding, esspesally when i'm talking about my own 'side'.

Blame is a stronger word than you seem to give it credit for. It's meant to humiliate, punish, or shame. None of these promote understanding. Unless you're also a fan of M.A.D. They encourage hostility and defensiveness. Even if mutually applied.

 

Also, you are saying that 'idiots' have themselves to blame for being violent, and not their lack of education, culture or any of the other factors present. Who's pointing fingers? Think about what you're saying before you get on your high-horse and start talking about 'truely caring about understanding'.

 

I'm saying, quite explicitly that the only people to blame for the idiocy that is people wanting a school teacher to be executed for naming a teddy bear at the recommendation of her students are the people who want a school teacher to be executed for naming a teddy bear. It is illogical and it is downright moronic to think that anyone else should bear responsibility for such a stupid idea than the people who put it forth and supported it. You can quote me on that and put it in your sig, if you like.

 

If blame worked any other way, then we would have to take survivors of school massacres to trial for everytime a taunted or disenfranchised kid blew away another student. Those who taunted the perpetrator may have fault, but they're not to blame.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Tale

[Nick_i_am]

These aren't people who believe they're rebelling against a great invasive evil. They were wanting a schoolteacher to be shot because she listened to a harmless suggestion from a group of muslim students.

Indeed, and why is that? Is it because it was a cultural faux pas, or is it because 'these people' are using any excuse they can get to denounce the west? They're massively overreacting, which suggests that it's got very little to do with the woman herself, and a lot to do with where she's from. Again, the quoted cleric saying 'this is part of the western plot against Islam'. THE WESTERN PLOT AGAINST ISLAM. Don't try to tell me that what i've said has nothing to do with this thread.

 

Blame is a stronger word than you seem to give it credit for. It's meant to humiliate, punish, or shame. None of these promote understanding. Unless you're also a fan of M.A.D. They encourage hostility and defensiveness. Even if mutually applied.

No, blame is an indicator of responsibility for a solution. Jeez you're depressing.

 

I'm saying, quite explicitly that the only people to blame for the idiocy that is people wanting a school teacher to be executed for naming a teddy bear at the recommendation of her students are the people who want a school teacher to be executed for naming a teddy bear. It is illogical and it is downright moronic to think that anyone else should bear responsibility for such a stupid idea than the people who put it forth and supported it.

Well yeah, I agree with this, calling for her to be shot is laughable. But so what? If she were executed they would only be 'accessories to blame', it would be the government that actually killed her. Which is why the school massacre analogy fails, since nobody has put on trial the forum members of 'iwanttoshootupmyschool.com' of anyone else who might have encoraged such.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Nick_i_am

[Tale]

Well yeah, I agree with this, but so what?

It's a stupid and extremist idea.

 

If she were executed they would only be 'accessories to blame', it would be the government that actually killed her.

1) The government would be to blame. 2) The government would be acting as an agent of its people in this instance since the government's original decision was simply jail. If they changed it, it would be at the request of the people.

 

Which is why the school massacre analogy fails, since nobody has put on trial the forum members of 'iwanttoshootupmyschool.com' of anyone else who might have encoraged such.

A child does not act as an agent of a forum. A government does often act as an agent of its people, at the request of its people. We do indict murderers-for-hire. Murder at request. And often enough, we give the requester the harsher verdict.

 

Blame is a stronger word than you seem to give it credit for. It's meant to humiliate, punish, or shame. None of these promote understanding. Unless you're also a fan of M.A.D. They encourage hostility and defensiveness. Even if mutually applied.

No, blame is an indicator of responsibility for a solution. Jeez you're depressing.

Be progressive. Stop pointing fingers and saying this or that, or both, is responsible. If you actually care about solutions, drop the "blame" bull****. It's not an indicator of responsibility, it's just an attempt to shame into a position. If "blame" were responsibility for a solution, then everyone is to blame for everything and the word becomes meaningless in most contexts it is used in. Because it's everyone's responsibility to solutions for major problems. Even the responsibility of those with no fault.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Tale

[Nick_i_am]

Yeah, you'd be right, except that the crowd isn't uniformly calling for her death (unless i've misunderstood), just for a stricter punishment.

 

Still, you're right, they are being idiotic in calling for such. I wouldn't be deported for naming a Teddy 'Jesus', or anything else for that matter. But my issue, on reflection, isn't with the mob itself.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Nick_i_am

[Gorth]

A government does often act as an agent of its people, at the request of its people.

Does the sudanese government have the sudanese peoples or the sudanese governments interest at heart then?

 

And are the motives of such actions even remotely related to anything regarding names, teddy bears and english school teachers?

 

Hence my previous question, who benefits from people being whipped into a frenzy?

 

Does a person who only ever gets one view presented, really have a choice in what to think?

[Tale]

Does the sudanese government have the sudanese peoples or the sudanese governments interest at heart then?

Honestly, I don't care. The prince pardoned and released her. And that I think was the ultimately right decision.

 

Does a person who only ever gets one view presented, really have a choice in what to think?

 

Heheh, oh boy. This is a loaded question for me which is why I won't go into detail. I'm a guy who denies the existence of free will, which is why I so greatly despise the word "blame."

 

But, no, he does not.

[Nick_i_am]

Looking back, you're right Tale, I used the word 'blame' too easily, when what I really meant was 'responsibility'.

 

Not that that changes my overall point.

[Tale]

Looking back, you're right Tale, I used the word 'blame' too easily, when what I really meant was 'responsibility'.

 

Not that that changes my overall point.

I'm not sure I disagree with your overall point as much as your language. The notion that it is a limited number of parties responsibility is anathema to me because I firmly believe it is the responsibility of all who have the ability to effect positive change.

 

Oh god, I'm an angry hippy! Someone shoot me before I start smoking pot and growing my hair back out long. Wait, what's that noise? It sounds like... a drum circle. IT'S DRAWING ME IN!

Edited December 3, 2007 by Tale

[Guard Dog]

Nevermind.

Edited December 4, 2007 by Guard Dog

[Walsingham]

If you are interested in Sudan, I can't recommend any book higher than 'War in Darfur' its awesome. Very clearly set out, but also very heavyweight in expertise.

 

Anyway, to chip in on Tale and nick, it sounds like you're talking at cross purposes. If you're pointing a finger of blame then yes it comes to an individual's choice. However, if you want to apportion blame then you're asking a why question. Why did x happen? And that's clearly not all down to an individual. I'd suggest some sort of influence diagram woudl help, if you can be bothered to draw one.