209. No religions ever exempted from justifying violence
Terrorism and Other Religions
by Juan Cole
ลัทธิก่อการร้ายและศาสนาอื่นๆ
โดย ฮวน โคล
Contrary to what is alleged by bigots like Bill Maher,
Muslims are not more violent than people of other religions. Murder rates in
most of the Muslim world are very low compared to the United States.
ตรงข้ามกับข้อกล่าวหาโดยพวกคนทิฐิมานะสูง
เช่น บิล มาเฮอร์, ชาวมุสลิมไม่ได้เป็นคนรุนแรงกว่าคนอื่นๆ ในศาสนาอื่น.
อัตราฆาตกรรมในโลกมุสลิมต่ำมากเมื่อเทียบกับในสหรัฐฯ.
As for political violence, people of Christian heritage in
the twentieth century polished off tens of millions of people in the two world
wars and colonial repression. This massive carnage did not occur because
European Christians are worse than or different from other human beings, but
because they were the first to industrialize war and pursue a national model.
Sometimes it is argued that they did not act in the name of religion but of
nationalism. But, really, how naïve. Religion and nationalism are closely
intertwined. The British monarch is the head of the Church of England, and that
still meant something in the first half of the twentieth century, at least. The
Swedish church is a national church. Spain? Was it really unconnected to
Catholicism? Did the Church and Francisco Franco’s feelings toward it play no
role in the Civil War? And what’s sauce for the goose: much Muslim violence is
driven by forms of modern nationalism, too.
ในแง่ความรุนแรงทางการเมือง,
คนที่นับถือศาสนาคริสเตียนในศตวรรษที่ 20
ได้บดขยี้หลายสิบล้านชีวิตในระหว่างสองสงครามโลก และ
ในระหว่างการปราบปรามในฐานะเจ้าอาณานิคม.
การสังหารมหาศาลอย่างโหดเหี้ยมนี้ ไม่เกิดขึ้น เพราะ ชาวคริสเตียนยุโรป
แย่กว่า หรือ ต่างจากมนุษย์เผ่าอื่นๆ,
แต่เพราะพวกเขาเป็นพวกแรกที่ทำสงครามให้เป็นอุตสาหกรรม และ
ดันให้มันเป็นต้นแบบแห่งชาติ. บางที
ก็มีการโต้แย้งว่า พวกเขาไม่ได้ทำในนามของศาสนา แต่ในลัทธิชาตินิยม. แต่, จริงๆ หรือ, ช่างใสซื่อจริง. ศาสนาและชาตินิยมพัวพันสนิทแนบแยกไม่ออก. กษัตริย์อังกฤษเป็นหัวหน้าของ Church of
England (นิกายอังกฤษ), และนั่นก็ยังมีความหมายมาก
อย่างน้อยในครึ่งแรกของศตวรรษที่ 20.
นิกายสวีดิช (Swedish
church) ก็เป็นนิกายแห่งชาติ.
สเปนล่ะ?
มันไม่เชื่อมกับลัทธิคาทอลิกจริงๆ หรือ?
ศาสนจักรและความรู้สึกของ ฟรานซิสโก ฟรังโก ต่อศาสนจักร
ไม่มีบทบาทในสงครามกลางเมืองหรือ? และ
ก็เหมือนกับมีห่านก็มีน้ำจิ้ม: ความรุนแรงมุสลิมส่วนใหญ่
ก็ถูกขับเคลื่อนโดยรูปแบบของลัทธิชาตินิยมยุคใหม่ด้วย.
I don’t figure that Muslims killed more than a 2 million
people or so in political violence in the entire twentieth century, and that
mainly in the Iran-Iraq War 1980-1988 and the Soviet and post-Soviet wars in
Afghanistan, for which Europeans bear some blame.
ผมไม่ได้ปัดข้อเท็จจริงที่ว่า
พวกมุสลิมฆ่าคนกว่า 2 ล้าน หรือกว่านั้น ในความรุนแรงทางการเมืองตลอดศตวรรษที่
20, และนั่นก็ส่วนใหญ่เกิดขึ้นในช่วงสงคราม อิหร่าน-อิรัค 1980-1988
และระหว่าง สงครามโซเวียต และ หลังโซเวียตในอัฟกานิสถาน,
ซึ่งพวกยุโรปก็มีส่วนต้องถูกตำหนิ.
Compare that to the Christian European tally of, oh, lets
say 100 million (16 million in WW I, 60 million in WW II– though some of those
were attributable to Buddhists in Asia– and millions more in colonial wars.)
เปรียบเทียบกับจำนวนคนยุโรปควิสเตียน
เอาเป็นว่า 100 ล้าน (16 ล้านใน WWI,
60 ล้านใน WWII—แม้ว่า บางส่วนในนี้ จะเนื่องมาจากพวกพุทธในเอเชีย—และอีกหลายล้านในสงครามปลดแอกอาณานิคม).
Belgium– yes, the Belgium of strawberry beer and quaint
Gravensteen castle– conquered the Congo and is
estimated to have killed off half of its inhabitants over time, some 8
million people at least.
เบลเยี่ยม—ถูกต้อง,
เบลเยี่ยมแห่งเบียร์สตรอเบอรี และ ปราสาท Gravensteen สุดเสน่ห์—ปราบคองโก
และ ประเมินกันว่า ได้ฆ่าทิ้งชาวคองโกเสียกึ่งหนึ่งในช่วงครอบครอง, ประมาณ 8
ล้านอย่างน้อย.
Or, between 1916-1917 Tsarist Russian forces — facing the
Basmachi revolt of Central Asians trying to throw off Christian, European rule
— Russian forces killed an estimated 1.5
million people. Two boys brought up in or born in one of those territories
(Kyrgyzstan) just killed 4 people and wounded others critically. That is
horrible, but no one, whether in Russia or in Europe or in North America has
the slightest idea that Central Asians were mass-murdered during WW I and
looted of much of their wealth. Russia at the time was an Eastern Orthodox,
Christian empire (and seems to be reemerging as one!).
หรือ, ในระหว่าง 1916-1917
กองกำลังพระเจ้าซาร์รัสเซีย—เมื่อเผชิญกับการปฏิวัติ Basmachi ในเอเชียกลาง
ที่กำลังขับไล่การปกครองของชาวยุโรปคริสเตียน—กองทัพรัสเซียได้เข่นฆ่าประชาชน 1.5 ล้านคน. เด็กชายสองคนที่เกิด หรือ
เติบโตในหนึ่งในเขตปกครอง (ไกรกิสถาน) เหล่านั้น เพิ่งฆ่า 4 คน
และทำให้คนอื่นๆ บาดเจ็บสาหัส.
นี่เป็นเรื่องสยองขวัญ, แต่ไม่มีใคร, ไม่ว่าจะในรัสเซีย หรือ ในยุโรป หรือ
ในอเมริกาเหนือ ที่มีความคิดแม้สักเสี้ยวว่า ชาวเอเชียกลาง
ถูกสังหารหมู่มหาศาลในระหว่าง WWI และ ถูกปล้มสะดมภ์จนเกือบหมด. ตอนนั้น รัสเซียเป็น
จักรวรรดิ์คริสเตียนสายตะวันออกดั้งเดิม (และก็ดูเหมือนจะฟื้นชีพขึ้นมาใหม่อีกแล้ว!).
Then, between half a million and a million Algerians died in
that country’s war of independence from France, 1954-1962, at a time when the
population was only 11 million!
แล้ว, ชาวอัลจีเรีย
ระหว่าง ครึ่งถึงหนึ่งล้านคน ที่ตายไปในสงครามกู้อิสรภาพจากฝรั่งเศส,
1954-1962, ซึ่งตอนนั้น ประชากรมีเพียง 11 ล้าน!
I could go on and on. Everywhere you dig in European
colonialism in Afro-Asia, there are bodies. Lots of bodies.
ผมสามารถจะสาวต่อไปเรื่อยๆ.
ทุกแห่งหนที่คุณขุดลงไปในลัทธิล่าอาณานิคมของชาวยุโรปใน อัฟริกา-เอเชีย,
มีแต่ซากมนุษย์. มากมาย.
Now that I think of it, maybe 100 million people killed by
people of European Christian heritage in the twentieth century is an underestimate.
ตอนนี้ผมคิดว่า
ชาวยุโรปนับถือศาสนาคริสเตียน คงได้ฆ่าถึง 100 ล้านคน
ในศตวรรษที่ 20 เป็นการประเมินที่ต่ำเกินความจริง.
As for religious terrorism, that too is universal.
Admittedly, some groups deploy terrorism as a tactic more at some times than
others. Zionists in British Mandate Palestine were active terrorists in the
1940s, from a British point of view, and in the period 1965-1980, the FBI
considered the Jewish Defense League among the most active US terrorist groups.
(Members at one point plotted to assassinate Rep. Dareell Issa (R-CA) because
of his Lebanese heritage.) Now that Jewish nationalsts are largely getting
their way, terrorism has declined among them. But it would likely reemerge if
they stopped getting their way. In fact, one of the arguments Israeli
politicians give for allowing Israeli squatters to keep the Palestinian land in
the West Bank that they have usurped is that attempting to move them back out
would produce violence. I.e., the settlers not only actually terrorize the Palestinians,
but they form a terrorism threat for Israel proper (as the late prime minister
Yitzhak Rabin discovered).
ในฐานะศาสนาก่อการร้าย,
อันนั้นก็เป็นสากลด้วย. ต้องยอมรับว่า,
บางกลุ่มใช้ลัทธิก่อการร้ายเป็นกลยุทธ์ในบางครั้งมากกว่ากลุ่มอื่น. กลุ่ม Zionists in British Mandate
Palestine เป็นผู้ก่อการร้ายเอาจริงใน 1940s,
ในมุมมองของอังกฤษ, และในช่วง 1965-1980, เอฟบีไอ ก็เห็นว่า
กลุ่ม Jewish Defense League
เป็นหนึ่งในบรรดากลุ่มผู้ก่อการร้ายในสหรัฐฯ ที่กระฉับกระเฉงที่สุด. ตอนนี้ ชาตินิยมยิว
ได้เข้าครองพื้นที่การเมืองสหรัฐฯ มากพอแล้ว, การก่อการร้ายจึงลดลง.
แต่มันจะผุดขึ้นมาอีกหากมันไม่ได้ตามอำเภอใจ. อันที่จริง, ข้อโต้แย้งหนึ่งที่นักการเมืองอิสราเอลแก้ต่างการยอมให้ชาวอิสราเอลเข้าจับจองพื้นที่เพื่อยึดพื้นที่ของปาเลสไตน์ใน
West Bank ที่พวกเขาได้ ช่วงชิงมา คือ ความพยายามใดๆ
ที่จะเคลื่อนพวกที่เข้ามาจับจองกลับไป จะทำให้เกิดความรุนแรง, นั่นคือ,
พวกจับจองพื้นที่จะไม่เพียงแต่ก่อการร้ายต่อชาวปาเลสไตน์,
แต่จะกลายเป็นภัยก่อการร้ายสำหรับรัฐอิสราเอลด้วย (ดังที่อดีต นายก รมต Yitzhak
Rabin ได้ค้นพบ).
Even more recently, it is difficult for me to see much of a
difference between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and
Baruch Goldstein, perpetrator of the Hebron massacre.
ในกรณีเมื่อเร็วๆ
นี้, ผมก็ไม่เห็นความแตกต่างระหว่าง Tamerlan Tsarnaev และ Baruch Goldstein, ซึ่งเป็นผู้ทำให้เกิดการสังหารหมู่
Hebron.
Or there was the cold-blooded bombing of the Ajmer shrine in
India by Bhavesh Patel and a gang of Hindu nationalists. Chillingly, they were
disturbed when a second bomb they had set did not go off, so that they did not
wreak as much havoc as they would have liked. Ajmer is an ecumenical Sufi
shrine also visited by Hindus, and these bigots wanted to stop such open-minded
sharing of spiritual spaces because they hate Muslims.
หรือในการระเบิดอย่างเลือดเย็นในเทวสถาน
Ajmer ในอินเดีย โดย Bhavesh Patel
และแก๊งฮินดูชาตินิยม. น่าเสียวไส้,
พวกเขาโกรธมากเมื่อระเบิดลูกที่สองด้าน,
ทำให้พวกเขาไม่สามารถอาละวาดมากเท่าที่ต้องการ.
Ajmer เป็นเทวสถานของซูฟีที่โอบรวมหลากศาสนา และ
ก็มีชาวฮินดูมากราบไหว้ด้วย, และพวกมิจฉาทิฐิเหล่านี้
ต้องการยุติการเปิดใจแบ่งปันพื้นที่ทางจิตวิญญาณ เพราะพวกเขาเกลียดชาวมุสลิม.
Buddhists have committed a lot of terrorism and other
violence as well. Many in the Zen orders in Japan supported militarism in the
first half of the twentieth century, for which their leaders later apologized.
And, you had Inoue Shiro’s assassination campaign in 1930s Japan. Nowadays
militant Buddhist monks in Burma/ Myanmar are urging on an ethnic cleansing campaign against the
Rohingya.
ชาวพุทธได้กระทำการก่อการร้ายมากมายและความรุนแรงด้วยเช่นกัน. หลายคนในนิกายเซนในญี่ปุ่น
สนับสนุนลัทธิทหารในครึ่งแรกของศตวรรษที่ 20, ซึ่งผู้นำของพวกเขาได้กล่าวขอโทษในภายหลัง. และ คุณได้เห็นการไล่ล่า ลอบสังหาร Inoue
Shiro ในทศวรรษ 1930s. ทุกวันนี้
ภิกษุพุทธคลั่งสงครามในพม่า กำลังยุให้ชำระล้างชนชาวโรฮิงญาให้สิ้นจากแผ่นดิน.
As for Christianity, the
Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda initiated hostilities that displaced
two million people. Although it is an African cult, it is Christian in origin
and the result of Western Christian missionaries preaching in Africa. If Saudi
Wahhabi preachers can be in part blamed for the Taliban, why do Christian
missionaries skate when we consider the blowback from their pupils?
ในส่วนของศาสนาคริสต์,
กลุ่ม Lord’s Resistance Army ในอูกันดา ได้เริ่มแผลงฤทธิ์
และได้ขับไล่ประชาชนกว่า 2 ล้านให้ไม่มีที่อยู่. แม้ว่าจะเป็นลัทธิความเชื่อหนึ่งของอัฟริกัน,
มันมีต้นกำเนิดในศาสนาคริสต์
อันเป็นผลจากการสั่งสอนของมิชชันนารีคริสเตียนตะวันตกในอัฟริกา. หากนักเทศน์ Saudi Wahhabi ถูกตำหนิว่า
มีส่วนใน Taliban, แล้วทำไม มิชชันนารีคริสเตียนจึงสเก็ตหลุดไป
เมื่อมาถึงการวางระเบิดโดยนักเรียนของพวกเขา?
Despite the very large number of European Muslims, in 2007-2009
less than 1 percent of terrorist acts in that continent were committed by
people from that community.
ทั้งๆ
ที่มีจำนวนมุสลิมยุโรปมากๆ, ในปี 2007-2009, การก่อการร้ายน้อยกว่า
1% ในทวีปนั้น กระทำโดยคนในชุมชนเหล่านั้น.
Terrorism is a tactic of extremists within each religion,
and within secular religions of Marxism or nationalism. No religion, including
Islam, preaches indiscriminate violence against innocents.
ลัทธิก่อการร้าย
เป็นกลยุทธ์ของพวกหัวรุนแรงสุดโต่งในแต่ละศาสนา, และภายในศาสนาฆราวาส ลัทธิมาร์กซ์
หรือ ลัทธิชาตินิยม. ไม่มีศาสนาใดๆ, รวมทั้งอิสลาม,
เทศน์การกระทำรุนแรงไม่เลือกหน้าต่อผู้บริสุทธิ์.
It takes a peculiar sort of blindness to see Christians of
European heritage as “nice” and Muslims and inherently violent, given the
twentieth century death toll I mentioned above. Human beings are human beings
and the species is too young and too interconnected to have differentiated much
from group to group. People resort to violence out of ambition or grievance,
and the more powerful they are, the more violence they seem to commit. The good
news is that the number of wars is declining over time, and World War II, the
biggest charnel house in history, hasn’t been repeated.
มันต้องใช้ความบอดพิเศษเพื่อมองว่า
มรดกคริสเตียนของชาวยุโรป เป็นของ “ดี” และ ชาวมุสลิม เป็นพวกรุนแรงตามปกติวิสัย,
หากพิจารณาจากสถิติการตายในศตวรรษที่ 20 ตามกล่าวข้างต้น. มนุษย์ก็คือมนุษย์ และเป็นสายพันธุ์ที่เยาว์มาก
และ เชื่อมโยงสัมพันธ์ระหว่างกันมากเกินกว่าที่จะทำตัวแปลกแยกจากกัน
แตกเป็นกลุ่มๆ. คนหันไปใช้ความรุนแรง
เพราะความทะเยอทะยาน หรือ เศร้าโศก,
และเมื่อไรความรู้สึกเหล่านี้มีอำนาจมากขึ้นเท่าไร,
พวกเขาก็จะลุกขึ้นกระทำความรุนแรงมากเท่านั้น.
ข่าวดีคือ จำนวนสงครามลดลงเมื่อเวลาผ่านไป, และ สงครามโลกครั้งที่สอง,
เรือนสุสานที่ใหญ่ที่สุดในประวัติศาสตร์ ยังไม่ได้ถูกผลิตซ้ำ.
© 2013 Juan Cole
Juan Cole teaches Middle Eastern
and South Asian history at the University of Michigan. His latest book,
Engaging the Muslim World, is just out in a revised paperback edition from
Palgrave Macmillan. He is also the author of Napoleon's Egypt: Invading the
Middle East (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). He has appeared widely on
television, radio and on op-ed pages as a commentator on Middle East affairs,
and has a regular column at Salon.com. He has written, edited, or translated 14
books and has authored 60 journal articles. His weblog on the contemporary
Middle East is Informed Comment.
ฮวน โคล
สอนวิชาประวัติศาสตร์เอเชียตะวันออกกลางและเอเชียใต้ ที่มหาวิทยาลัยมิชิแกน. หนังสือเล่มล่าสุดของเขา,
“มีส่วนร่วมในโลกมุสลิม”, เพิ่งวางตลาด.
เขายังได้เขียน “อีจิปย์ของนโผเลียน:
การจู่โจมตะวันออกกลาง”.
เขาปรากฏตัวในรายการทีวี, วิทยุ และ ออนไลน์ หน้า op-ed
ในฐานะผู้ให้ความเห็นเกี่ยวกับกิจกรรมในตะวันออกกลาง, และ เขียนเป็นประจำในคอลัมน์
Salon.com. เขาได้เขียน, เป็นบรรณาธิการ,
หรือแปลหนังสือ 14 เล่ม และ เขียนบทความสำหรับวารสารทางวิชาการ 60 บท. มีเว็บบล็อกที่ Middle East is
Informed Comment.
Published on Tuesday, April 23, 2013 by Informed Comment
Neil Hausig • 15 hours ago
We always look to blame the problems we generate on someone
else. We live, especially in America, completely in the present. History eludes
us. We are not remotely curious about the past. Until we let go of the
fantasies that generate our self esteem as a nation we will continue to
misunderstand how the world really functions.
lingum > Neil Hausig • 6 hours ago
The day we let go of those fantasies (USA! USA!), we'll have
a complete emotional breakdown.
gardenernorcal > lingum • 5 hours ago
The 01% might, but I venture most of us would be the
healthier for it.
Siouxrose > Neil Hausig • 10 hours ago
WE WE WE. As if this "WE" is woven from ONE
UNIFORM strand. This meme is shallow, inaccurate, and deceiving. And here comes
'Neil," another "new poster" pushing it... and it has 8 liikes.
Really? Is that the level of consciousness in this forum?
Everyone has the same fantasies,
huh? And everyone has a self-esteem issue, huh? Yeah... pay no attention to
those numbers or the millions murdered due to religious DELUSIONS. You try to
turn this subject to the individual's self-esteem. What crap!
itsthethird > Siouxrose • 10 hours ago
Sir, your protest should be insightful.
Tom Carberry • 12 hours ago
"This massive carnage did not occur because European
Christians are worse than or different from other human beings, but because
they were the first to industrialize war and pursue a national model."
Wrong. The Europeans engaged in
mass murder long before industrialization. Christianity came into fruition
under the Roman Empire, one of the most violent and cruel empires in history.
The Romans slaughtered their enemies and didn't treat their own people much
better.
Constantine adopted Christianity
because it helped him in war. Cromwell slaughtered the Irish in the name of
religion. The Puritans slaughtered the natives in the name of religion. By the
time of the industrial revolution, Christians had conquered most of the
Americas, committing genocide along the way.
The industrial revolution helped
the Christians consolidate their gains.
chryso > Tom Carberry • 11 hours ago
Mass murder existed long before Xianity. It's not religion;
it's power. Religion is just the team jersey. It's a guy thing. They see
resources piled up somewhere, they want them, they band together to take them.
Entitlement+force. Old story. Old as the hills. Only the scale has changed.
Tom_Larsen > chryso • 5 hours ago
RE: Mass murder existed long before Xianity. It's not
religion; it's power. Religion is just the team jersey.
This is a pithy aphorism. There's
a lot of truth to it. But you'd have to re-define "mass" murder as
before the industrial revolution that "mass" was exponentially
smaller. "Scale" matters.
RE: It's a guy thing. This is very unfair to the overwhelming
majority of males. It is not the average guy that wants war, it is the
political leaders - a very tiny minority of (usually, but not always) men.
Males must be socially conditioned in the "glories" of martial
culture from an early age to get them to heed the "call-up."
Devoff > Tom_Larsen • 28 minutes ago
Hmm I think if you take into account anthropological and
historical data, the gendered aspect of violence is a bit more complex than you
are presenting it, as inherently emergent from coercive state power. .
I'm not suggesting violence is
some sort of male "instinct" or biological force, but that militarism
is almost completely male-gendered across wide ranges of time and culture.
Sometimes, rather than a minority, a substantial majority of viable males are
militaristic. (ie, Sparta, Zulu,), sometimes without the existence of a powerful
central state or a highly vertical power structure (Melanesia, Australia)
chryso > Tom_Larsen • 2 hours ago
It's a nature vs. nurture issue. How soon does the
conditioning start? It's not that sinister. it's rather natural. I see children
playing, and very young boys will tend t make weapons out of every available
object - twigs, acorns, clods of dirt, the neighbour's tomatoes, toilet paper
(yep) and heave this stuff at each other. Girls will tend to groom each other
and share stuff. I taught high school for 35 years. the girls will come
supplied, while t boys mooch stuff off them. the girls will listen, wait their
turn, while the boys become obstreperous, do things to take control - even if
destructive, bad control being preferable to no control. (pardon the typos -
dinner is calling)
And yes, I realize the "guy thing" comment is a
little unfair to most men. I know some wonderful men, like my husby, who is
making dinner, dear man.
Siouxrose > chryso • 10 hours ago
It is to an extent a "guy thing," but it's more
accurate to explain how the Dominator Society operates, as opposed to the
Partnership Model as brilliantly uncovered (and explained) by Riane Eisler in
her important book: "The Chalice and the Blade." I've read MANY books
in my lifetime, and from the perspective of Consciousness-Raising (on history
and what purports to be Human Nature), this is among the top 20. HIGHLY
recommendable.
greghilbert > Siouxrose • 4 hours ago
I see you are getting hit for grinding the
"anti-we" ax on the neck of a commenter who clearly objects to what
the predatory empire elites are doing. In any case, I wanted to comment in
resonance to your recommendation of Riane Eisler -- see
http://sen4earth.org/articles/...
A rising concern of my own -- ie
that I've not seen expressed elsewhere though I'm sure it has been -- is that
the feminine is being purged in the USA, or perhaps more accurately, is being
masculated. I observe it happening in ways large and small. One example: more
women being given combat roles, in service of dominator-elite need for more
cannon fodder. Military recruitment ads of late are increasingly targeting
women. I'm not arguing against ERA, but rather worrying that the
dominator-elites are learning how to pervert feminism into masculinism.
Siouxrose > Tom Carberry • 10 hours ago
I mostly agree. However, apart from the industrial
revolution, what gave white European Christians the REAL edge, and just about
any Indigenous American would bear witness to that fact were they alive to tell
the tales, was the GUN. Had guns never been invented, world HIStory would have
unfolded along very different tracks. Even now, it's chiefly due to weapons
that the U.S. treats most of the world the way a slum landlord treats his
tenants.
Tom_Larsen > Siouxrose • 5 hours ago
Your post, brief as it is, has more analytic content than
Carberry's. You are raising the issue of material conditions, the state of
technological development etc. Which is far more of a scientific a way to
analyze history. Even the gun became far more destructive when it became mass
(industrially) produced.
Religion has shown itself to be
quite malleable when it comes to needs of whatever political agenda. Conquest,
imperialism, don't come from religion per se, rather they come from the
ambitions of the ruling classes. I am an atheist, but I have realized that
religion is just a tool that is used to mask that ambition.
Durrutix > Tom Carberry • 3 hours ago
I think you are wrong. This is rare. Wrote a post below.
gardenernorcal • 15 hours ago
People resort to violence out of ambition or grievance, and
the more powerful they are, the more violence they seem to commit.
Very true. And the more powerful
they are the less responsibility they seem to take for the violence they cause.
The good news is that the number of wars is
declining over time, and World War II, the biggest charnel house in history,
hasn’t been repeated.
I am thinking that depends on you
slice and dice the numbers and how you label and market the violent episodes.
Or whether or not you bother to keep accurate records of the mayhem you create.
Tom Carberry > gardenernorcal • 7 hours ago
Modern oppressors have learned how to oppress without so
much war. With billions of extremely poor people, the 1% exploits them without
the need for guns or as many guns.
Tom_Larsen > Tom Carberry • 5 hours ago
RE: Modern oppressors have learned how to oppress without so
much war.
Stunning. Maybe it's an issue of
just when do you define the "modern" era? The 20th century was, in
terms of war and destruction, the most violent in world history. Our own
country has been at constant war for 12 of the last 13 years of the 21st. It is
very true that oppression is not limited to war, but un-coercive oppression
wouldn't be possible without (at least) the threat of coercion (violence, war
etc).
gardenernorcal > Tom_Larsen • 5 hours ago
I think what Tom is saying is the 01% aren't directly
involved in the violence. Their hands aren't dirty.
The World Bank now controls the
governance of how many countries?
Over the past two decades, the
poorest countries in the world have had to turn increasingly to the World Bank
and IMF for financial assistance, because their impoverishment has made it
impossible for them to borrow elsewhere. The World Bank and IMF attach strict conditions
to their loans, which give them great control over borrower governments. On
average, low-income countries are subject to as many as 67 conditions per World
Bank loan. African countries, in need of new loans, have had no choice but to
accept these conditions.
And today it's expanded to our
allies in Europe, Ireland, Greece, Cyprus, etc.. The crash of 2009 accomplished
many things.
http://rainbowwarrior2005.word...
Tom_Larsen > gardenernorcal • 3 hours ago
RE: I think what Tom is saying is the 01% aren't directly
involved in the violence.
And this a new thing? Even the
kings of Ancient and Feudal societies, while they may have "led"
their armies, were surrounded by a retinue that protected them from any real
danger.
gardenernorcal > Tom_Larsen • an hour ago
But back in days of old the kings ventured out on to the
battlefields.Today they don't even bother to leave home.
gardenernorcal > Tom Carberry • 7 hours ago
Right. The bailouts and all this "austerity" is an
excellent example.
Siouxrose • 10 hours ago
Once again, what's missing from an otherwise thoughtful
article is the role played by patriarchy. All of the religions mentioned (apart
from Buddhism) center on a male god, the father. Generally, this father-god is
seen as one whose affection must be earned. And the conditional nature of this
love and approval is then capitalized upon by religious and secular elites in
order to maneuver the masses into obeying a number of strict rules.
Since the research and
scholarship ofnotable Feminists have generally remained marginalized, otherwise
intelligent male writers fall into the faulty use of gender-neutral
generalities. These grant no witness to the insights brought to the human
equation by women who see outside of the Orthodox Male Frame.
Until an honest moral reckoning
is made of what it's cost societies to render to women (and all things
Feminine) second-class status, a full understanding of the balance lost cannot
be found. And until this balance is rectified, societies will continue to
reflect maladaptive behaviors, violence, chief among those.
Christianity is a product of old
Rome and its armies. Thus the idea of Armies FOR Christ or Holy War is an
especially well-regarded and deeply ingrained Christian concept.
The numbers do speak for
themselves. Left out is mention of how important torture was to the early
church and forcing the majority of citizens into complicity with its
("moral") rule. Millions of women were burned for opposing church
creeds or showing any signs of disobedience to a male-centered culture that
turned them into worthless chattel. Remnants of this group, along with its
retrograde misogynistic mentality are once again attempting to do likewise!
see more
itsthethird • 13 hours ago
A Tree is rooted in earth and all the trees are connected by
mother earth, moon, sun, Milky Way, and the universe beyond. No tree says my
roots are stronger, longer or more than another every tree knows its place and
shares the abundance of all and willingly gives itself over for change as
appointed
gardenernorcal > itsthethird • 11 hours ago
Too bad man can't learn that lesson.
Siouxrose > gardenernorcal • 10 hours ago
EXACTLY! MAN cannnot learn that lesson because he refuses to
listen to, learn from, and build PARTNERSHIPS with women. How many corporate boards,
seats of high office, or religious positions of leadership are held by women? A
great many men act like the driver who's lost but refuses to ask his mate (or
any passing pedestrians) for directions.
Durrutix • 7 hours ago
Not a big fan of Juan Cole but I agree with the sentiments
expressed in this article. In their zeal to promote their particular ideology,
the "New Atheists" are being used as cat's paws to demonize Muslims
in particular and thereby justify imperialism.
Note that Bill Maher spends
approximately 100x as much time attacking Muslims as he does Jews. To be fair,
he does spend a lot of time attacking Christians as well, but Christians are
not currently being subjected to genocide.
The very idea of lumping 1
billion people together and portraying them as ignorant savages is obscene.
Whether dressed up as atheist rationalism or cultural superiority, this is
fundamentally a form of Orientalism. I highly recommend Edward Said's work on
the subject.
According to a study conducted at
the University of Chicago, over 95% of suicide bombings are motivated by
occupation, not religion. Religion is highly useful as a divide and conquer
stratagem, however.
Tom_Larsen > Durrutix • 3 hours ago
There's a couple of glaring omissions in Cole's article, did
you notice? Cole blames all the big religions plus nationalism and even
Marxism!* He doesn't mention capitalism or imperialism! These are by far and
away the biggest drivers of the most destructive forms of terrorism (the state
kind).
*(What were those nasty
"Marxists" doing with their "terrorism" anyway? Maybe
struggling for independence from imperialism, from capitalism, just maybe?)
Durrutix > Tom_Larsen • 3 hours ago
I agree with you Tom in general terms.
However you cannot deny that the
"new atheists" are being used as shills to promote Islamophibia -
and, ironically, Marxist o phobia. In the latter case they have a reason to be
frightened.
Tom_Larsen > Durrutix • 3 hours ago
I agree with you about the "new atheists" (Sam
Francis, the late Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins etc.). But what's new
is that these atheists are ideologues very much in the service of empire, shall
I say, eerily like their (anti-) colleagues in mainstream religions (going back
a long, long time).
JohnRedican • 11 hours ago
The Chinese had gunpowder and made firecrackers. Europeans
made guns. I would argue that the devastation of war was enhanced by ingenious
technical advancements in the machines of war, almost all made by Europeans.
While Arab nations were very advanced in the sciences, they somehow didn't turn
this to their advantage in war. During the Crusades, they battled Christian
forces to a standstill, but by World War I they were considered a joke,
militarily. I'll be the last person to defend religion, but surely other
factors are involved in evaluating the histories of death.
Siouxrose > JohnRedican • 10 hours ago
I offered a VERY similar analysis years ago in this forum.
saskatchistani > JohnRedican • an hour ago
The Arabs were psyched out by the Mongols, who sacked the
world's most culturally-advanced city, Baghdad, and pillaged and destroyed much
of the residue of the Arab world.
The Muslims were among the most highly civilized people on
the planet, and they were crushed by illiterate, violent savages (note how
history repeats itself). After that they sort of gave up on being cultured,
69Tuscany • 14 hours ago
This video shows Dzhokhar Tsamaev leave the Boston Marathon
after the explosions wearing his backpack, while undercover agents run from the
scene minus their backpacks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
"Mayor Bloomberg says we
have to change how we view Constitution after Boston Bombing."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Tom Carberry > 69Tuscany • 12 hours ago
Thanks for the link. Days ago when the press put out the
many stills of people in the crowd, I picked out the two soldier types as my
candidates for the bombers. The picture of the one soldier leaving without his
backpack does it for me. His pack had a little white patch just like the blown
up one.
The picture of Dzhokar Tsarnaev
climbing out of the boat on his own power makes me wonder where he got the neck
wound.
gardenernorcal > Tom Carberry • 10 hours ago
I now wonder about that neck wound as well. Especially since
during the night I saw a video in the news that showed him in the boat being
hit by three "stun" gernades. I wouldn't think he'd be able to walk,
talk or gurgle after that, but here we have film of him getting out of the boat
on his own power?
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/vide...
69Tuscany > gardenernorcal • 5 hours ago
I am so sick of these media whores diminishing the character
of this young man and pronouncing him guilty without proof.
gardenernorcal > 69Tuscany • 5 hours ago
Me too especially after seeing all the video of the Craft
agents and their backpacks. "Despite what your momma told you violence
does solve problems".
http://www.thecraft.com/
69Tuscany > Tom Carberry • 5 hours ago
I recently read that the neck wound was made by a knife. His
father is supposed to arrive in the States on Wednesday. Hopefully the
situation will take a positive turn.
gardenernorcal > 69Tuscany • 11 hours ago
Thanks for the link. Pretty amazing. Those packs certainly
look more like they are carrying pressure cookers than the bags the brothers
had.
I'd sure like to see some
financial statements for CRAFT to see who paid them for what services in
Boston.
http://www.youtube.com/v/bjocG...
This is huge.
limerick4 • 5 hours ago
In conclusion: Humans through the ages have used ideologies
(religious and political ideologies mainly) to both inspire and justify harm to
other humans. Our brains love short cuts to avoid the harder process of
critical thinking.
Joseph_Ryan • 11 hours ago
Peter King, chair of the House Homeland Security Committee,is
a special kind of hypocrite, a leading Islamophobe who spent years supporting
the IRA terrorists of his own ethnicity. Those Irish Catholics combined
religion, nationalism and terrorism from the 1920s onward, serving as an
example to later generations of terrorists elsewhere in the world.
In 2011 The New York Times
described King's link to Irish terrorism:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03...
Benjamin Grunewald • 11 hours ago
Weren't they from Dagestan? Not to nitpick but Americans are
geographically challenged already. Long way from Kyrgyzstan.
WTF? • 11 hours ago
Face it: Religionists and others contaminated with the god
virus source most of the "hate" on this planet. They are responsible
for war, over-population, conservatism, xenophobia and caste-systems, global
warming, widespread destruction of the environment and plain human stupidity
and misery.
Bring on the rapture.... I want
these people gone.... now!
John Mitchell > WTF? • 5 hours ago
So Obama's a "religionist"? In what way?
Was Hitler a
"religionist"? Have you ever read his opinion of Christianity?
The list goes on and on, but if
you take comfort in believing that all evil originates in religion, it's not
likely to change your beliefs.
lingum • 8 hours ago
Previously it was said black people were inferior; now it's
Muslims are violent....some old BS of bigots.
Jim Sadler • 3 hours ago
I won't swallow the Kool-Aide. Many nations are very
grateful for the colonial period as their lives improved markedly due to a more
modern life. Even going back to the Crusades are we supposed to believe that
the Arab world had not attacked and invaded Europe frequently or that pilgrims
traveling to the Holy Land were not being murdered, rapes and pillaged. From my
point of view Islam is not even a religion much less deserving of respect. It
seems that Islam is a fountain that sprays illiteracy and poverty among its
nations.
Victor Smith • an hour ago
The casualties of "Christian" countries were not
for religious reasons, but for economic and political reasons.
Mohamed was a warlord. He
conquered the Arabian peninsula, and eventually, Persia, almost certainly more
for economic reasons than for religious reasons.
In some Muslim countries, such as
Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, killing one's wife or daughters is not
considered murder. If a girl is raped, she is required to marry her rapist.
Many young women commit suicide instead. Many women commit suicide because of
severe
mistreatment by their husbands. Again, this is not included
in murder statistics.
Ed Lytwak • 39 minutes ago
The three pillars of the patriarchy are religion, violence
and land ownership, i.e. private property.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น