Terrorism

[DrFree]

Hi, Flowperson,

Thanks for your contributions. I find them intriguing and a little disturbing.

Originally Posted by flowperson

Some progress towards the transformation of nomadic mindsets and tribal governance structures over the decades since WWI has taken place, but even with the huge injections of wealth and educated individuals into their societies from Western nations through tourism and trade, the cultural mindset of tribalism still predominates on the streets.

This sounds like a stereotype. The Middle East has developed a substantial middle class that functions pretty much as it does in the West. To call them "nomadic" is arrogant and demeaning. And it typifies Western attitudes toward the Middle East. Much of the widespread Muslim anger toward the West is due to that pervasive attitude. How would you like it if other countries referred to you as quaint? "Gee, they seem to think they have a real democracy and a real religion!" A little respect might go a long way.

Originally Posted by flowperson

[T]he British attemped to unite Arab monarchs under the Saudi King to repel the Turks who were an arm of the Kaiser in the ME during WWI.

This callous imperialism is certainly part of the historical problem. The British, with the eager collaboration of the other Allies, imposed a national structure on the Middle East based on what they thought would be easiest for them to control, without any attention or respect for ethnic affinities. It took hundreds of years for the West to overcome its own ethnic barriers to create nations that spanned Franks and Germans, Angles and Welsh, with some measure of peace. Yet the West called the Middle East primitive when they didn't immediately accept Western concepts of a democracy to span centuries-old enmities.

Originally Posted by flowperson

And it is now an acknowledged fact that U.S, forces knew more about Arab culture when they were over there during WWII than they did when they were sent there in the early 90's and once again in 2003.

They certainly don't understand them now. Witness the tiny fraction of diplomats who even trouble to learn Arabic. I doubt they understood them any better in WWII.

Originally Posted by flowperson

And now people are resorting to terrorism because of the forced changes which have been imposed upon the ordinary people there over the past 75 years or so, when such transformations from one such mindset to another formerly took centuries of natural change to occur.

Let's try to get beyond the glib and flippant, and try to examine more carefully some of the factors that lead to this response.

• The West has historically propped up unpopular rulers, such as the Shah of Iran. We supplied them with arms that upset the historical balance that enabled the downtrodden to rebel against corrupt tyranny.
• The West has exploited the resources of the Middle East, ensuring the flow of oil, without concern whether the common person benefitted.
• The West has treated the Middle East as quaint and primitive (see above), unready for full partnership in the world community, and certainly not ready to manage their own nuclear technology.
• The West organized and abetted the establishment of Israel, which is seen by Muslims not only as a theft of land, and a displacement of thousands of their people, but as a denial of the human rights of remaining Muslims to participate as equals in the new nation.
• The West, in particular the US, has refused to recognize that a Muslim's religious fervor is as sincere and legitimate as a Christian's or a Jew's.
• The West has continuously held the threat of war over the Middle East to keep them in their place.

Frankly, it is easy to understand why the Middle East is frustrated. Since the monarchs we have put in place are deeply invested in the status quo, just as we intended, the people are unable to fight back as nations. Therefore they fight back through extra-national organizations such as Al Quaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas. And when driven to fight, these groups use the tactics that work, not just the tactics that their enemies regard as fair.

Originally Posted by flowperson

Don't ever forget that all that is coherent in our technical and scientific heritage and history was preserved mostly by Arabs while Europe decayed in the dark ages until Europeans were "ready" to progress.

This is important. Arab cultures retained Greek knowledge that was lost to Europe and even Greece, and preserved it into the Fourteenth Century, especially in Moorish Spain. Unfortunately, Islamic fundamentalists, just like Christian fundamentalists of the same era, found much of that "knowledge" blasphemous, and destroyed much of it. We are left with only a small fragment of that glory.

Originally Posted by flowperson

The issues the West has with that entire situation has prompted the West to declare a global War on Terrorism (thanks to our current Administration), and to somehow associate the need for this with the Islamic religion. This seem to be just another exercise to label people and nations into submission before the Western-Capitalist-Urban mindset.

Yep. What the West doesn't understand, it steps on.

Originally Posted by flowperson

9/11 was tragic, but it was/is not the cause of all this. It was the trigger that started all of this, and, IMHO, it still isn't very clear just who or what pulled that trigger on 9/11. The real cause is that you can take people out of their culture over the short term, but you can't take a culture out of the people unless it happens over the long term.

It's as shallow to ask for the cause of 9/11 as it is to ask for the cause of lightning's striking a particular tree. When the storm builds up so much energy, there will be strikes somewhere.

Namiste.

[DrFree]

In a lot of ways this thread has been disappointing: A lot of bickering about causes and blame, and not much by way of suggestions for solutions. Can we convert the thread into a spirit of brainstorming, i.e., suggestions for improving the situation, without any criticism?

In that spirit, I offer the following:

1. Part of the energy fueling the revolutionary spirit in the Middle East comes from a middle class that is frustrated in its ability to achieve what the West touts as the economic benefits of democratic capitalism. The West must assure that that middle class succeeds, not only by promoting stability, but also by investing in enterprises that promote that success (and that doesn't mean the kind of economic imperialism that impoverishes the people we're supposedly helping).
2. The Middle East must be allowed to evolve its own form of democracy, and it may be radically different than ours.
3. If we can do it, they can do it. The West cannot persist in maintaining its nuclear, or any other, monopoly. I'm inclined to think that nuclear technology is one of those areas that must be transitioned to control by the world as a whole, rather than by any individual nation.
4. We should support recent initiatives by Islamic prelates calling for dialog with Christian leaders [The Economist, October 13th, 2007, page 65]. '[T]hey suggest the basis for such a dialogue should be two commandments offered by Jesus Christ as a summary of all the law and prophecy of the Hebrew scriptures: to love God with all your might and to "love your neighbour as yourself." Since Muslims agree with both injunctions -- and could indeed back them up with copious material from the Koran -- why not take them as a starting point?'
5. The West disagrees on human rights with the Muslim world, especially the part that adheres to Sharia Law. Making capitulation on these issues a precondition of negotiation guarantees there will be no negotiation.

These are merely suggestions. What do you have to offer. Remember: this is now a brainstorming session; no bickering or criticism.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Boy, you don't want much do you Doc?

Do we really want the competition from a first world Middle East? Isn't it better for us to preserve our economic and technological hegemony? Seriously, there aren't enough natural resources for everyone to enjoy our standard of living. Shouldn't our top concern be our own well being? I don't think it's ever been explained to the American public how what we're doing in Iraq supports our national interest. What exactly does our government hope to achieve? I know it's about securing oil, but how exactly does that play out? What's the fifty year plan?

I'm one of those godless Liberals. I opposed the war from the beginning. But I find myself in the same intellectual quandary that I suppose you're in given your remarks in the OP. I can't take a solid position on whether we should just pull out of Iraq because I don't know what the real objectives were/ are. It's never been explained. I have a general idea having read the PNAC paper and the opinions of apologists like Thomas Friedman, but I don't ever see anything but glossy oversimplifications, punditry from so called "consultants" to the media, official propaganda, and the vitriol of true believers on the left and right. So until I get a better handle on what the real motives and issues are I can't begin to venture a solution.

Sorry, I guess that doesn't help. I would say that if one takes the time to reduce the bickering and name calling down to essentials, useful information about the nature of the problem emerges. This is why I jumped in on the epithet thing. There is something valuable to be learned by studying how cultures insult each other.

Chris

[China Cat Sunflower]

I'm finishing up Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth. I took a four book cruise through second and third wave feminist thought because I'm trying to understand some things. The next book up in my stack is The Great War For Civilisation, the Conquest of the Middle East, by Robert Fisk. It looks to be about a thousand pages in paper back. I'll let you all know if I have any epiphanies that stick.

Chris

[flowperson]

Well Dr. Free, aside from the fact that you have misinterpreted most of the context of what I had to say, I enjoyed your response immensly and chuckled about it for some time. The devil is always in the details doctor. More intelligent people need to be aware of the big pictures of their histories and act accordingly.

Have a nice day.

flow....

[bob x]

I don't think that flow's beliefs about terrorism arising from conflicts between Westerners and non-Westerners stands up to examination. In Ireland and the Basque country, both sides were "Westerners"; in Sri Lanka, neither side is.

[flowperson]

Hi Bob...we're dealing with very ancient social archetypes here, not western-eastern stuff. You've got to get beyond a labeling mindset to understand it. It's almost Biblical, you know nomadic/tribal vs. urban/capitalist. An admitted overgeneralization to an extent, but nevertheless at the root of it all IMHO. Chuckling a little about your answer also. You almost sound like that Dole guy who always referred to himself in the third person when he ran for President.

Oh and I'd like to get a reaction to these articles while I'm a it. It seems that urban/capitalists are determined to go global with their Orwellian plans to watch everyone all of the time and also to try to tell people what to do and how to behave. Doesn't anyone in authority over there in teh UK or in the U.S. understand that this will all but extinguish the creative spirit in people over the long term ? Hey...it was done to the Beatles in the 60's. But then, that's probably the whole point of it all.

Of course in S. Africa it's all so much easier. If you don't like a person's original music...you just shoot him/her dead.

UK Spy Agency Puts Out Call to Gamers - EarthLink - Technology News
In Britain, law has long arms, eagle eyes - Los Angeles Times

FACTBOX-Recent tragedies involving S.African entertainers | Reuters

BBC NEWS | World | Africa | Shock at SA reggae star shooting

flow....

[bob x]

It's almost Biblical, you know nomadic/tribal vs. urban/capitalist. An admitted overgeneralization to an extent, but nevertheless at the root of it all IMHO.

In all the cases I cited, both sides were equally "urban", with no "nomads" in sight.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by DrFree

In a lot of ways this thread has been disappointing: A lot of bickering about causes and blame, and not much by way of suggestions for solutions. Can we convert the thread into a spirit of brainstorming, i.e., suggestions for improving the situation, without any criticism?

I submit that the practice of terrorism can not be ended with a gun or a bomb anymore than a drug addiction can be ended with a needle, or alcoholism with a bottle.

You can not 'pre-empt' a drug addiction with a needle, but you can pre-empt it with wise words from a loving parent, neighbor, or even alleged enemy. Upon having the words there is a choice. Without the words, in the dark, there is no choice. Choices have to be provided and shared to end terrorism... not removed. Even a rebuke provides a choice. A real vote is better. Democracy, or civility, is promoted by adding choices... not by removing them.

So what can be done? The most peaceful day in Iraq was the day that everyone voted. Make it a daily practice. Referendum every decision. Ask the Iraqi people what they want of the US military... don't decide for them. Ask them when to leave. In the West, the populations should require that their governments provide them line-item voting power over every foreign agreement and foreign affair. Trade, war, everything. Agreements between countries MUST be ratified by the people of those countries or they are INVALID. Is anyone going to hell for their government? For their representative? Anyone responsible for the actions and agreements made by their government? No? That IS the real problem... within the Middle East and within the USA. Every individual must be responsible for these agreements and actions. Today, major decisions and actions appear to represent the wills of the individuals in government instead of the will of the people. For example the representation in the USA has been declining for over 230 years as the population has increased. If any country wants to promote democracy, then seek agreements which require country-wide votes to be taken. For example, don't negotiate with the leaders of Iran. Instead bypass them and require votes of the entire Iranian population with corresponding votes of the local public to answer to any questions posed by the Iranian government or Iranian people. Find, magnify, and empower the will of the people within countries. The USA for example should require votes to be taken of the public within the USA and the public of a corresponding country like China... for a trade agreement between the USA and China. Then there will be a real conversation that involves the people of those respective countries rather than simply being media fed the one made between the representative idiots of the governments.

Solving instability is mechanically easy... divide the decision making across more people. A member of the public asked by the public to help make decisions, and thus be accountable to the agreements the public is involved in, has no interest in terrorism against the public. Where there is no method to Jihad, or to lobby, influence, and struggle with neighbors... then the last resort is weapons, which really removes freedoms and improves crime. So open the doors and ask the world's population the questions... give the world ratifying power over the agreements that involve them, like OIL trade, or opposition to their atomic weapons manufacturing. Empower the people over their own oppressive regimes, both government and non-government... including those of and within the USA, Europe, etc... The root of terrorism, to cause change, would dry up and wither away. It is not whether change is caused, but whether there is a vote to cause change. Today, even within the USA, purchasing a lotto ticket has greater value than gambling a vote for a representative to make the decisions. That has really got to change, both at home and abroad.

[flowperson]

Originally Posted by bob x

In all the cases I cited, both sides were equally "urban", with no "nomads" in sight.

C'mon Bob...chuckle, chuckle...you're supposed to be an educated man. Where a person lives does not determine who he/she really is in their soul. It's how people desire to live that is the important thing.

flow....

[bob x]

Still don't see it, sorry. Nobody involved in Ireland, the Basque country, or Sri Lanka had any desire to take up nomadic lifestyles.

[flowperson]

Ok Bob...you win...I have better things to do than to try to convince someone who won't listen or understand, that people only want to be what they desire in the long run.

Where the hell would someone go if they actually desired to be a nomad in today's world ? Basques and Celts were, in the main wandering, herders in ancient times. Ceylonese were hunters/gatherers. Human beings always long to go back to the golden times, whether that's a garden or an open wilderness. Tourism and the "escape urge" that sells so many pickups and SUV's are proofs that the unattainable desires are still out there. It is the ancient myth of "the two brothers" which is the basic theme underlying the entire Old Testament.

But then agriculture came along, villages and towns came along, ciities came along, fenced borders came along, etc. YOU CAN"T BE A NOMAD AND LIVE OFF THE LAND IF THE CONSTRAINTS OF CULTURE PREVENT YOU FROM FOLLOWING YOUR BLISS. So all of us, each and every one of us must live an urban-modeled life, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY THE WHOLE WORLD IS NOW. EVERYTHING AND EVERYBODY IS WIRED, TIED DOWN, AND TRACKED.

Case closed (for me).

flow....

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by bob x

Still don't see it, sorry. Nobody involved in Ireland, the Basque country, or Sri Lanka had any desire to take up nomadic lifestyles.

Well then you have a poor understanding of Celtic culture which remains to this day very tribal. The peoples of both Northern Ireland and the Basque country do indeed represent exactly what Flow meant in opposition to outside imposition of rule. For the Catholic Irish it is/was London, for the Provos it is/ was Dublin and for the Basque its Madrid. And I can tell you that as a Scot I know it to be alive and kicking here. Our main Political Party in the devolved Scottish Parliament is a party with the aim of gaining complete independence for Scotland. Celts do not like being told what to do by outsiders any more than Iraqis or Palestinians.

Tao

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Well then you have a poor understanding of Celtic culture which remains to this day very tribal. The peoples of both Northern Ireland and the Basque country do indeed represent exactly what Flow meant in opposition to outside imposition of rule. For the Catholic Irish it is/was London, for the Provos it is/ was Dublin and for the Basque its Madrid. And I can tell you that as a Scot I know it to be alive and kicking here. Our main Political Party in the devolved Scottish Parliament is a party with the aim of gaining complete independence for Scotland. Celts do not like being told what to do by outsiders any more than Iraqis or Palestinians.

Tao

A nomad doesn't have to be tribal and a tribe doesn't have to be nomadic... so your point?

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by flowperson

Ok Bob...you win...I have better things to do than to try to convince someone who won't listen or understand, that people only want to be what they desire in the long run.

Where the hell would someone go if they actually desired to be a nomad in today's world ? Basques and Celts were, in the main wandering, herders in ancient times. Ceylonese were hunters/gatherers. Human beings always long to go back to the golden times, whether that's a garden or an open wilderness. Tourism and the "escape urge" that sells so many pickups and SUV's are proofs that the unattainable desires are still out there. It is the ancient myth of "the two brothers" which is the basic theme underlying the entire Old Testament.

But then agriculture came along, villages and towns came along, ciities came along, fenced borders came along, etc. YOU CAN"T BE A NOMAD AND LIVE OFF THE LAND IF THE CONSTRAINTS OF CULTURE PREVENT YOU FROM FOLLOWING YOUR BLISS. So all of us, each and every one of us must live an urban-modeled life, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY THE WHOLE WORLD IS NOW. EVERYTHING AND EVERYBODY IS WIRED, TIED DOWN, AND TRACKED.

Case closed (for me).

flow....

Sounds like intellectual BS to me... I've lived this year as a nomad within the USA. It is simply the nature of my work and lifestyle at the moment.