| Subject: Re: fundamentalism is scary |
Author:
Raisinmom
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 11:43:52 07/16/02 Tue
In reply to:
Astrid
's message, "Re: fundamentalism is scary" on 00:31:12 07/16/02 Tue
>This is my thinking, too. So predominantly, then, the
>increase in intolerance in Europe is being blamed on
>anti-Israeli demonstrations that usually are rooted in
>support for Palestinians? Or people just don't know?
I don't think anyone blames anti-Israeli demonstrations, or support for Palestinians, per se. I think most don't know where the rise is coming from.
>I don't equate understanding with support or condoning.
>
...
>And I do think that Palestinians have other options,
>but when a child is raised with hatred, raised to
>curse an entire people, raised to believe that their
>family home is worth fighting for (and I understand
>that many of these families still dream of returning
>to their properties, fifty years later), raised to
>believe that their god commands them to fight... I
>don't agree with the result, but I understand it.
I understand (no pun intended) the difference between "understanding" and "condoning," but I stick with my original statement. I cannot understand targeting innocent civilians as a reaction to the Israeli/Palestinian situation. It makes no sense. It is incomprehensible. It is killing babies, women, children. This is not civilized or moral behavior, and I do not understand it, because it is evil. It's a far cry from your blacks joining gangs example; that certainly isn't a good situation, and may involve death or other crimes, but it's not the same level of coldly calculated evil as blowing oneself up at a pizzeria filled with flirting teenagers.
>I think that until each side understands the other
>(not condones, not even necessarily forgives, but
>comprehends the anger of the other), we'll get nowhere.
I don't agree with this often-quoted platitude. One need not "understand" to come to a solution, though it certainly helps (the whole "Getting to Yes" negotiation strategy, i.e., figuring out what the other side really wants and giving it). One can take something as a dealbreaker with no comprehension of why that's the case or any agreement that it's really that important.
>No, but they changed the makeup of the population
>simply by coming. The Palestinians felt that their
>way of life was threatened (as does any dominant group
>as it begins to see its own numbers apparently
>shrinking--this is the root of most white supremacy
>talk, or at least what they claim is their motivation.)
Okay, but so?
>But that doesn't change my point--that Palestinians
>saw themselves defending their way of life much like
>Israel currently seeks to defend itself. The
>difference, as you would point out, is that Jews
>weren't arming themselves against Palestinian citizens.
No. The difference is that Israel currently seeks to defend itself from *suicide bombers who are killing innocent civilians.* Astrid, this is very, very different from Palestinians defending a "way of life" (whatever that means) from immigrants.
>I would criticise this--but it's a bit more than just
>xenophobia. It's the right of a people to
>self-determination.
Then the Palestinians should turn their anger on Britain. The Jews didn't show up and disenfranchise the Palestinians -- Palestine was *not* an independent country before the Jews got there. And being upset that immigrant Jews were coming and changing the Palestinian "lifestyle" (and what does this mean, anyway?) is not the same as trying to defend a country's sovereignty.
>Truthfully, wasn't he criticising different power
>structures which are manufacturing truth rather than
>trying to accurately present it in the media?
LOL, Astrid, no matter how many times you ask me, the answer is still the same. I did not get this impression from his piece, perhaps because I found his "truth" to be so manufactured itself. Did you know that "to Fisk" is blog-talk for parsing a piece and pointing out the factual inaccuracies that tend to slant the piece in an anti-American/capitalist way (so named because Fisk is notorious in some circles for this)?
Re: Canada: We DO love you.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 