From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Wed Oct 16 2002 - 13:43:08 MDT
Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 Dehede011@aol.com wrote:
>
>
>>[snip] There does seem to be a rather large number of
>>radicals out there that don't mean us any good.
>
>
> Ok, fine. The question then arises as to *why* that is the case?
>
> Is there a fundamental human character trait that makes one wake
> up in the morning and go out into the world and promote "hatred"
> (as in "prejudiced hostility or animosity" [Merriam-Webster])?
Actually, their are memesets, religious and otherwise, that
promote the view that the world will not be "right" until those
holding different viewers are overpowered and/or destroyed. It
is not simply a matter of fundamental human character traits.
It is not simply an individual phenomenon.
>
>
>>Nor can I find that the radicals hate us for any wrong we have
>>done them. However they do seem to use real or imagined wrongs
>>as a means of whipping up the moderates.
>
>
> Ah-ha (maybe) -- on this basis the "radicals" are promoting "animosity"
> to generate a larger power base (presumably). But is the larger power
> base organized to preserve a historical world view (i.e. Muslims must
> defeat Christians or Jews), or is it organized to uplift an underclass
> (i.e. impoverished Arabic individuals)?
>
> It would appear (to me) that there are multiple paths for "uplifting"
> (as in improving economic conditions). Why is there a focus by people
> (from say the Palestinians to the Tamil [I could add *lots* of other
> "tribes" here]) on eliminating the "opposition" instead of finding
> those paths?
>
Classic imperialism of all stripes, including Islamic, does not
seem to be primarily concerned with "uplifting" in physical or
economic ways.
> Does the problem lie in the quest for power by the leaders instead of
> the seeking of economic uplifting for the masses?
>
Excluded middle error?
> The "real" question I may be asking here is whether the so called
> "leaders" of disenfranchised groups have a legitimate claim for
> improving their situation (i.e. they have a "plan") or whether
> they are individuals operating primarily for their own self-advantage?
>
In the face of an imperalistic and exclusive group memeset the
particular leaders of the moment are not terribly relevant. The
memeset needs to be rendered harmless or contained.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:37 MST