TERRORISM: and justice (was : Re: TERRORISM: Seriousness and potential strategies)

From: Jacques Du Pasquier (jacques@dtext.com)
Date: Thu Sep 27 2001 - 06:07:21 MDT


Allow me to make a comment on this :

Samantha Atkins a écrit (27.9.2001/02:02) :
> See what happens to close minded people? They draw highly inaccurate
> parallels and get somewhat insulting of those who think differently. It
> obviously is quite important to recognize what it is that we do that
> provokes terrorists activities and a great deal of hate toward this
> country. Some of it is for our virtues, true enough. But more than
> a little is also for our faults, especially faults of policy and of
> action.

The idea that you (the US) are somehow responsible for these attacks
has some popularity here in France. But on this instance, it doesn't
seem true. The islamists just want to impose their world order,
according to their sense of justice. It has little to do with wrongs
you would have done according to YOUR sense of justice.

A French editorialist (Serge July) ended an article recently saying :
"we should remember that the only real solution to terrorism is
justice". This is an illusion : you just cannot imagine that, the
world being fair according to your sense of justice, a large group of
people could want to kill you ; but as a matter of fact, that's the
the way it is. According to their sense of justice, your very life is
an offense to the Creator. They hate you. Not for what you have done
to them ; for your (lack of) beliefs, for your way of living, for your
Infidelity.

> If we cannot admit where there are valid claims against us and
> act to correct such things where possible then we are irresponsible
> and dishonest as a nation and as individual citizens of that nation.

The word "valid" is the problem. Their claims (like having Jews out of
Palestine, and having US out of Saoudi, and finally extending islam
over the planet) are valid according to them, but not according to you
(well, to me at least). As this translates in attacks on you, you
cannot afford so much tolerance as to treat them as "valid", even if
they are valid in some sense (= they are consistant with their sense
of justice).

> I personally find it quite disturbing when Bush said that other
> countries are either with us and by implicaiton with our policies in
> our "war on terrorism" or are with the terrorists. That is a very
> dangerous and blatantly false dichotomy. One can be very much
> against terrorism and still not believe the planned and proposed
> actions are reasonable and not back them. The same is true of
> nations. Just because we have been hurt badly is not an excuse for
> polarizing the world into "for US" and "against US".

Of course this is a bit of a constraint. But I think it is quite
understandable. The US have been hurt, they seek back up. It doesn't
seem very responsible from us (France) to decline it -- and then ask
more support from you when things go worse.

As to the link with extropian preoccupations, I think an important
link is : how we deal, not technically, but "morally", with such
situations.

Jacques Du Pasquier



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:58 MDT