First, a primer:
- Now; on one hand Terry Gilliam has got it right: The situation and the response as well the irony (humor). But Im not going to propose some sort of ‘zen peace’ will solve it.
- Yet the seriousness that such ‘terrorism’ is countered by is just plain insanity. The respnsibility is just take the fuckers out, as well as, just accept that every counter measure feeds another responsive violence into the pipeline of the real.
Excuse my insensitivity, but the problem is that in taking the fuckers out we cant get all the fuckers, so there is always a back lash. The families, the friends, collegues who have nothing to do with the actions of their known person, but also the ones that are ‘not activated’ until something triggers them to blame. As well, always someone else who has a gripe for what ever reason.
If we can choose what religion we want to beleive based upon what we already think about things, why cant people then choose to ‘become’ terrorists, just because it is justified anger, or matyred self righteousness?
I like what someone said recently (paraphrase): there has always been terrorism. Its just now the trope is being (over) used to consolidate power, to manifest the True (one) ideological state.
There is always violence. There is always a ‘whole’ world that is coming to an end. People are always dying for one reason or another. We deal with it as we do, in our personal ways. But when the state is taken to hold the responsibility of ‘we’, as if there is a ‘nation that is mourning’, meaning some sort of grand unitive entity that is having an emotion, well, that opens the door to a ‘father’ state, a state that must have a cause, and right now, the cause is terrorism.
The funny thing is, is that the ‘terrorrist’ is reacting the the very ideal that calls out terrorism as a big problem. It is only ‘big’ because the state is being challenged. Are not gang killings ‘terror’? Are not drug deaths ‘terror’? Why are we locating occasions where quite a few people are actually dying? I mean 1000’s of people die every day due to gangs, drugs, racism, bad meat and veggies, domestic violence and car accidents. Are they not also terrible?
How are we segregating these terrible items in a scaffolded hierarchy of ideals?
Not to be too overreactive, but Nazi Germany did as much to consolidate ideology. It does not matter what some actual thing might be (for example, the Jews were just people and families); what matters is what meaning is imbued into real categories to mobilize ideological support.
Ok. Heres the REPOST:
Explosions in Brussels. A friend on Facebook asked: “What now constitutes an overreaction or under-reaction?”… I think you’re right, our so to speak Western Civilization is morally bankrupt, unable to act, unable to make up its mind and accept the responsibility of this issue as its own. We pretend with ourselves that we are not […]