june gloom on 14/9/2012 at 08:53
you say NSBM as if there's any other kind of black metal
SubJeff on 14/9/2012 at 09:27
Actually I think the Northern Europeans are amongst the most civilised and forward thinking nations.
LarryG on 14/9/2012 at 16:11
So let's see if I've got this right. The candidates for explaining this seemingly irrational behavior, in no particular order, are:
* Religious fundamentalism of any sort somehow encourages this behavior. And fundamentalist Islam in particular is prone to this because it is medieval in its outlook, despite the fact that nothing in the Koran sanctions such behavior.
* The climate. Hot temperatures makes for hot tempers.
* The geography. Flat terrain leads one to making snap judgements, while rugged and forested terrain encourages thought.
* Poverty. Economically disadvantaged peoples just behave irrationally. Poverty leads to poor education which in turn leads to easily manipulated people.
* Politics. Politically oppressed peoples lash out in anger with little direct cause.
* Colonialism. British and French occupation of the Middle East and their subsequent disengagement created significant sovereignty issues, leading to all sorts of political, religious and economic problems. These in turn result in irrational behavior against anything that looks, sounds or smells of colonialism to large segments of the population.
* Oil. Though nobody mentioned this, it has to be mentioned. Maybe it belongs with poverty. Maybe with colonialism? Maybe not.
Have I missed any?
SubJeff on 14/9/2012 at 16:26
You haven't missed any, you just twisted the ones you've got.
Poverty leads to poor education which in turn leads to easily manipulated people. If you don't know or understand much and don't have access to information the big guy in the shiny car and suit seems to have a lot of knowledge and what those dirty Americans threatened our children?!! And so on.
These deadheads have now targeted British and German embassies and the leaders of their countries don't seem to be trying to explain the logic failure.
I'm rapidly losing any sympathy for these people.
Muzman on 14/9/2012 at 17:07
Quote Posted by LarryG
* Islam somehow encourages this behavior because it is medieval in its outlook, despite the fact that nothing in the Koran sanctions such behavior.
...
Have I missed any?
Not Islam per se, religious fundamentalism. Although with Muhammad being a something of a warrior leader, justifications for violence are a bit easier to find in the Koran, Hadith etc, whereupon they can be spun for other ends.
CCCToad on 14/9/2012 at 21:47
Quote Posted by Vasquez
Religion is obviously a big part of the culture in Middle East, and religion makes people act crazy in other parts of the world too, but I believe the basis of this mob frenzy behaviour is still more cultural than actually religious. Settling things with violence seems quite a strong trait there, and of course the Western world has done it's share of war-faring, torturing and killing, but for some reason we've been striving to grow out of it (not necessarily on individual level, but at least socially and legally). Maybe the big wars had something to do with it.
More than a trait....it is an honor-driven society in most of the Islamic world, which leads to the same violent clashes over matters of honor that you'd see in Feudal Japan and in Europe. Hell....one of our ANP shot his own dad because the dad had taken some of his money.
Yakoob on 14/9/2012 at 22:28
So on another forum we have a poster with a clear "nuke 'em" attitude towards the muslims. But instead of just dismissing him as a bigot, I thought to play a bit of devil's advocate. Crossposting:
At what point does the majority/government/extremists/etc. of a group become representative of the group of as a whole?
The main counter-bigotry argument, as in the linked picture, is always "well not everyone in group X is as extreme!" - basically, don't punish the whole group for the sins of the few. But how many "fews" does it take before we CAN punish the whole group? Even if only one person does not hold their views, is that sufficient not to generalize the whole group?
Also, is there any stats on what % of the muslim population in various countries holds extremist views (i.e. "bomb the US to all hell" or something)? I've always learned how it's only the most hardcore groups (like Al Qaida) that espouse those beliefs, but then shit like this goes down and you see massive crowds rioting and railing; same thing when 9/11 happened and people cheered on the streets, and lets not forget the revolution in Iran was basically going from more liberal/western openness to more conservative theocracy - and it was the public that demanded it. No doubt this is probably further magnified by US media trying to milk though. So has there been any actual studies done on that?
To clarify, I'm not espousing we should "nuke em" or anything, I'm just throwing a counter-argument for discussions sake.
Quote Posted by Vasquez
Religion is obviously a big part of the culture in Middle East, and religion makes people act crazy in other parts of the world too, but I believe the basis of this mob frenzy behaviour is still more cultural than actually religious. Settling things with violence seems quite a strong trait there, and of course the Western world has done it's share of war-faring, torturing and killing, but for some reason we've been striving to grow out of it (not necessarily on individual level, but at least socially and legally). Maybe the big wars had something to do with it.
Mmmhm, I said this before, but that's what I've learned from my masters looking at various conflicts around the world. There's so many reasons for "hate" - religious, ethnic, political, economical etc. Perhaps it's just the effect of looking at so many at once but I started to feel that the issue wasn't a
reason for the violence; the issue was an
excuse. At the end of the day, many people just need someone they can stab in the eye and not feel guilty about it. Arguably, that's what allowed Hitler to convince the whole nation to hate on the Jews, even if the Jews had little to nothing to do with the actual issues (though, Hitler did genuinely believe they did, if you read Mein Kampf). Scapegoats give us a channel to vent our frustrations.
Kolya on 15/9/2012 at 08:54
The negative stereotyping you just described is at the core of such aggression. The attack on the German embassy in Sudan was long prepared by preachers describing and waving around pictures from demonstrations that happened in Germany before. These demonstrations were held by a group of nazis who work with the fears of the middle class demonstrating against the building of mosques, "foreign infiltration" and shit like that. And while doing so they like to wave around the well known caricatures of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban, etc. Pictures and stereotypes on both sides.
In essence it is a media conflict but also of opportunity. These people get so riled up about a fucking youtube video or pics from a small demo in a far away land, while at the same time their Muslim brothers and sisters get bombed to hell in Syria. But going there and helping them isn't quite as easy as attacking an embassy in a mob, I guess.
Lazarus411 on 15/9/2012 at 09:02
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Actually I think the Northern Europeans are amongst the most civilised and forward thinking nations.
...and only 80 years ago, the entire nation of Germany voted in the Jew-killing party.
Lazarus411 on 15/9/2012 at 09:11
the leprechaun-killing party polled second I think.
