Steve James wrote:It takes a particular type of cold-bloodedness to stream the murder of people at prayer. I refuse to connect it to the right because I reserve the right to be cold-blooded toward anyone who would do such a thing. Unfortunately, the shooter seems to connect what he did to the US.
Less than 24 hours after a crazed gunman stormed two mosques in New Zealand killing some 49 people, an Australian senator sounding a lot like a damn senator from the U.S. has blamed the mass shooting of Muslims ... on, you guessed it ... Muslims.
Shortly after the attack at not one, but two mosques where Muslims had gathered to pray, Queensland senator Fraser Anning tweeted: “Does anyone still dispute the link between Muslim immigration and violence?” the Guardian reports.
As if that weren’t horrible enough, Anning doubled down adding: “As always, leftwing politicians and the media will rush to claim that the causes of today’s shootings lie with gun laws or those who hold nationalist views, but this is all cliched nonsense.”
Steve James wrote:I'm saying that the guy is responsible for his acts, and I don't think I'd hesitate putting him down. But, not because he represents the right. I don't spend energy hating something so undefined. I know lots of people who support Trump or consider themselves on the right, and some might even agree with some of his manifesto. I take it to mean that they simply don't grasp what they're saying. The only time it'll matter is when they try to put their beliefs into action.
If I label it "right," it just gives others the opportunity to label it "left." Yep, he writes things that we hear here all the time. People say that it's just harmless free speech. Well, when that guy walked into the mosque, he couldn't know that there might have been Christian or Jewish visitors. It should remind people that whatever he did to those people, he'd be willing to do the same to you.
The guy did what he did based on labels, not because anyone he shot had ever done anything to him. I try to avoid making the same mistake.
For example,Less than 24 hours after a crazed gunman stormed two mosques in New Zealand killing some 49 people, an Australian senator sounding a lot like a damn senator from the U.S. has blamed the mass shooting of Muslims ... on, you guessed it ... Muslims.
Shortly after the attack at not one, but two mosques where Muslims had gathered to pray, Queensland senator Fraser Anning tweeted: “Does anyone still dispute the link between Muslim immigration and violence?” the Guardian reports.
As if that weren’t horrible enough, Anning doubled down adding: “As always, leftwing politicians and the media will rush to claim that the causes of today’s shootings lie with gun laws or those who hold nationalist views, but this is all cliched nonsense.”
Steve James wrote:Well, I know a bit about White supremacy. I've lived under it all my life. I also understand that "White" people generally think it is the norm or, at least, the way it should be or, at worst, just the way it is and that's that.
I'm against being hot-blooded when it comes to these issues. That is, I know lots of people who have said the same things that the shooter did, but I won't treat them as Nazis because they say those things. Of course, there is a connection between rhetoric and action. But, I have seen people who've used the rhetoric who've asserted that it has nothing to do with Nazism or fascism. Rather, they label any criticism as "leftist." Imo, that's because many people on the "Right" will condemn the actions of the shooter. The question is who is sincere. That sincerity will determine my response.
No, I don't accept the "right/left" distinction when it comes to moral actions. I'm not interested in equating them. That's either naivete or just laziness. If I just condemn the right, people will use it as an excuse to condemn the left. In the process, nothing is done about it. Putting armed guards in front of churches, mosques, synagogues, and schools will not change the views of these people. It's an ideology that has to be addressed before its recognized as destructive. Yes, Trump often champions it, but he's one of those people I don't think has a clue of its ramifications.
The one thing all these shooters have in common is their desire to start a "race" war. I'm not willing to just assume whose side anyone would be on. And, I'm not wasting my energy of false enemies.
That's the question. Did she know exactly what she was doing?
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=5D4F32D6
I refuse to connect it to the right
I am talking specifically about condemning White Nationalism of the Alt-Right which I see as being both an underlying ideology and driving force in these types of killings which, while having a very long history, seem to be accelerating and spreading.
Exactly what are you friends saying that the NZ killer said? He had a lot in that manifesto, so could you be specific? I agree with some of it too. For example, that Trump is a "symbol of renewed white identity." Of course, I don't think that's a good thing as the killer clearly did.
To be clear (I thought I was already clear about this), the Right is not the same as the Alt-Right or White Nationalist movements
Users browsing this forum: G. Matthew Webb and 38 guests