Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.

Recently I was involved in a discussion regarding the two Boston Marathon bombers.  It started off with someone expressing concern about the amount of anger and hatred being directed towards the bombers.

I am dismayed and afraid about the amount of hate and vengeance for the two who planted the bombs. It is spreading the attitude of vengeance in our country. I saw a quote from Ghandi this morning which I have not verified, but it struck me as true. "An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind". What is the difference between those two and us wanting to kill them?

This comment launched a discussion that had one side advocating that we should try to understand – show “empathy” towards how people could become so “disenfranchised” that they would commit such violent acts?  They also argued that it was unhealthy for us, as a society, to feel so much anger, hate and a desire for vengeance against the perpetrators.

I disagree.

We have the ability to indulge ourselves in this discussion precisely because we live in a civilization that instinctively and actively removes the monsters from society. We should be thankful that the instinctive emotion by our society is anger, disdain and hate towards these monsters and not empathy or compassion.

A civilization that frets too much on whether it's acceptable to dehumanize monsters has little expectation to survive in the long-run. It only took two monsters to shut down Boston. And I think we all know that there are many many edge cases out there that could become such monsters.  Our civilization could be severely disrupted by a handful of individuals like the Boston Marathon bombers.  We should show no tolerance whatsoever for individuals that act in this way.

Therefore, as a society that seeks to survive, we should absolutely show the maximum amount of disdain, disgust and contempt for human beings to engage in such behavior. We should absolutely make it clear that people who engage in this act are so loathed that we no longer even think of them as human but rather as animals, vermin, and monsters. We so reject their actions that we figuratively have kicked them out of our species.

I think it's intellectually facile to argue that it's somehow "wrong" to dehumanize human beings like this. At best, it's the result of not thinking through the consequences of what would happen if a significant plurality of our society showed an ounce of compassion or empathy towards these kinds of monsters. And at worst, it's simply indulging in feel-good sanctimonious back patting (i.e. "Look at me, I'm an intellectual because I imagine that intellectuals are above feeling 'negative' human emotions).

If we want to keep our society, we better hope that people continue to think of human beings that would seek to destroy them as monsters, vermin, animals and worse.  “What is evil?” someone asked. Pointlessly and indiscriminately murdering innocents who were there to support loved ones participating in an event that celebrated excellence. That’s evil.

Just my 2 cents.


Comments (Page 5)
on Apr 23, 2013

.... aaaand the thread is going.... going................. goooooooooone.

 

I have a stated policy of avoiding involvement in this sort of borderline-conspiratorial rhetoric. There's just no way to win such an "argument".

on Apr 23, 2013

Scoutdog
I have a stated policy of avoiding involvement in this sort of borderline-conspiratorial rhetoric. There's just no way to win such an "argument".

Yes, it's a bit that way...hence my reluctance to be wandering down the no-nukes path.

Afterall it was Frogboy himself who requested this forum section remain free from 'politics' [primarily of the contentious kind].

His OP is about something akin to what Newt said in Aliens .... re 'monsters' ....

 

 

on Apr 23, 2013

I don't understand the apologist for our enemies.  We are terrible for dropping the bombs on Japan, but when Japan bombed us...it was our fault. When the terrorist kill thousands in attacks all over the world, it's our fault.  Really?  We may not be perfect, but the Japanese were fucking monsters to their enemies for a decade before they attacked us.  Look at what these Islamic fascist fucks do to the women in their nations, how they treat their own people. Fucking hypocrites to apologise for them and then say America is to blame due totheir economic policies.   Have the balls to point out monsters when you see them instead of blindly defending everyone but America.

on Apr 23, 2013

Perfectly in agreement with the OP.

If you can't live by the most basic rules of society, you need to be removed from it. PERMANENTLY. With any means necessary.

A solution like the Prison City of "Escape from New York" would work for me as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on Apr 23, 2013

mastroego

Perfectly in agreement with the OP.

If you can't live by the most basic rules of society, you need to be removed from it. PERMANENTLY. With any means necessary.

A solution like the Prison City of "Escape from New York" would work for me as well.

 

Nah, the Los Angeles one would be much better, surrounded by water.

on Apr 23, 2013

Alstein

Quoting Frogboy, reply 14

and personally, I believe in due process and not summary execution by cop or mob.

Is anyone suggesting they not get a trial?

Lindsay Graham for one.  He pretty much says send them off to Gitmo

 

We have to maintain our standards, or we get blights like Gitmo, which is the biggest stain on America's honor since WWII, and with much weaker justification than what we did during WWII.  (I say this as a veteran and someone who for the most part supported the Iraq War)  You also get things like the maltreatment and torture of Bradley Manning.  (he's guilty, but he didn't deserve to be tortured)

 

Yes, we can hate the monsters, but we don't have to become the monsters.   Too many folks seem happy to become the monster.  

 

 

 

 

 

Most rational post in this thread.  +1

on Apr 23, 2013

Had they the bomb in 1944, the Japanese would have used it without hesitation.

on Apr 23, 2013

mastroego

Perfectly in agreement with the OP.

If you can't live by the most basic rules of society, you need to be removed from it. PERMANENTLY. With any means necessary.

A solution like the Prison City of "Escape from New York" would work for me as well.

 

 

 

 

Be careful what you wish for. 

I believe DOC just posted an interesting thread of some additional 'loss-of-freedom/privacy' where 'living by the rules' is the intended goal.   http://forums.stardock.com/443458/page/1/

 

 

 

 

Of course the bombings in Boston were horrific and my thoughts and prayers are with the victims/families.  Should those responsible be punished?  Sure.  Should heightened security and a certain amount of loss-of-personal freedom (as usually happens after something like this) be expected by the population?  Sure, it's inevitable.  However, the most important reaction after such horror should not be vengeance or even the seeking of 'justice' rather the seeking of answers as to why individuals such as those continue to remove themselves from society at large in order to perform such acts.  Only a deeper understanding of same can lead to taking the appropriate actions as individuals and as a nation that which may serve to prevent such actions in the future.

on Apr 23, 2013

the_Monk
However, the most important reaction after such horror should not be vengeance or even the seeking of 'justice' rather the seeking of answers as to why individuals such as those continue to remove themselves from society at large in order to perform such acts. Only a deeper understanding of same can lead to taking the appropriate actions as individuals and as a nation that which may serve to prevent such actions in the future.

I'm of the opinion that this is utopian fantasy, at serious odds with reality.  I don't believe any amount of 'understanding' will prevent such actions in the future.  I've seen no evidence for believing otherwise.  Furthermore, there's no way to measure the effectiveness of 'understanding' or anything done as a consequence of 'understanding', to know anything has been thereby prevented.

I understand that certain people are evil and must be dealt with.  The evil should know they will be dealt with if they commit evil.  Fairly, with due process, with a presumption of innocence, but dealt with when confirmed to be evil.  Removing those who have committed evil from the general society, however that is accomplished, is the only way to truly protect it.

on Apr 23, 2013

Also, understanding their point of view doesn't mean they have a valid one.  People do evil shit for non valid reasons all the time.  What do you say to a terrorist that want sot kill you because you are not a muslim and/or you believe in liberty or capitalism?  Okay, great you have understanding, so now what?  Going to convert?  Then maybe we have peace!  Oh shit, did you convert to Sunni or Shia?  Either way, someone still wants you dead. I do think that looking at the issue and trying to understand what got us here is important, what both sides did to get us to the point of wanting to kill, but you have to understand that it may mean jack shit in the end.  

on Apr 23, 2013

I'm of the opinion that this is utopian fantasy, at serious odds with reality. I don't believe any amount of 'understanding' will prevent such actions in the future. I've seen no evidence for believing otherwise. Furthermore, there's no way to measure the effectiveness of 'understanding' or anything done as a consequence of 'understanding', to know anything has been thereby prevented.

I understand that certain people are evil and must be dealt with. The evil should know they will be dealt with if they commit evil. Fairly, with due process, with a presumption of innocence, but dealt with when confirmed to be evil. Removing those who have committed evil from the general society, however that is accomplished, is the only way to truly protect it.

 

 

 

I believe my opinion goes to the prevention of such acts.  Prevention is possible, just not in the way many seem to want to go about it.  That is neither utopian fantasy nor at odds with reality.

I don't believe one must wait for misbehavior in order to correct the potential for it.  There are always things we as individuals and as nations can 'do better'.  The focus can be that of 'policing' or that of 'peacekeeping'.  The resulting societal structure/rules and the enforcement of same can only be aided through 'understanding'.

 

on Apr 23, 2013

the_Monk
I don't believe one must wait for misbehavior in order to correct the potential for it.

Too 'Minority Report' for me.  But then you Canucks have criminalized opinions (hate speech) - no real barrier to criminalizing 'thought' or 'leanings'.  Or 'treating' 'pre-criminals'.

on Apr 23, 2013

myfist0


Quoting Polistes, reply 50Because a land invasion would have killed millions of men, women, and children all indoctrinated to die for teh emperor.

Posting sources like CNN, that use unnamed government officials as their source, I can see why you are so misinformed. CNN is nothing but a government propaganda broadcaster. It is NOT "according to the the surviving suspect", it is not even by someone that will show their face.

 

Was Hiroshima Necessary?

Why the Atomic Bombings Could Have Been Avoided
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html 

No fancy background effects or semi-hot dimwits reading government prepared statements for you, but give it a try.

 

 

Posting links to IHR, an incredibly racist holocaust denial site is of course much worse than posting a link to CNN.

on Apr 23, 2013



Too 'Minority Report' for me.  But then you Canucks have criminalized opinions (hate speech) - no real barrier to criminalizing 'thought' or 'leanings'.  Or 'treating' 'pre-criminals'.

 

I am merely suggesting the success of prevention (ie. correcting misbehavior potential) is largely influenced by focus on one or the other, policing or peacekeeping.  We can all make a difference as a small part of the collective whole.  If one can keep the peace while correcting behavior shouldn't that be the desired approach?  It is in how we treat that 'criminal intent' that we make a difference.  Therein lies the need for 'understanding'. 

on Apr 23, 2013

We understand what they're trying to do and then we stop them from doing it.  We don't alter ourselves to fall in their line with their corrupted worldviews.