Thanks for your response Eugene. I think Amos Oz puts it well in the NYTimes
today.
Molly
Struggling Against Fanaticism
By AMOS OZ
The real struggle is not between nations or religions, but
rather within them: a battle between fanatics and everyone
else.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/opinion/14OZ.html
Eugene Matusov wrote:
> Hi everybody--
>
> Thanks Ana for the interesting reflection provided by Noam Chomsky. I
> think he makes important points although I do not fully agree with him
> since he seems to put too much agency on Western countries at expense of
> other countries and people whom he seems to consider victims who just
> react to aggression...
>
> Here are my concerns. While we are mourning this tragedy, new tragedies
> are being in preparation... Bush administration threatens everybody who
> in their view supports, harbors, or sympathizes with terrorists with a
> war. Many Palestinians celebrating the successful on streets
> automatically become a target. Afghani and Iraqi (Iranian? Libyan?
> Syrian? Pakistani? Chechen? Irish? Basque?) people fit the description
> of the target for the Bush's anti-terrorist strike as well, of course.
>
> I think it is very productive to focus on what defines "terrorist
> action." Are bombings of Dresden (no military targets at all, more than
> 100,000 civilian casualties) or Hiroshima in WWII, or Tripoli (in
> 1986?), or Baghdad (1991), or Belgrade (2000), or Grozny (Chechnya) are
> acts of (state) terrorism? Where are boundaries of "non-terrorist,
> military action"? How is terrorism defined: by the target and intention
> of the action or by impact on civilians (so-called "collateral damage")?
> Is it OK for the sake of fighting terrorism to bomb a city? These are
> difficult questions that should be decided before any military action is
> taken place.
>
> One more concern. I understand that a shock caused by the tragedy can
> disrupt one's thinking and it takes different time for different people
> to regain a sense of control. However, I noticed anti-intellectual
> sentiments among people I interact with probably based on the
> emotion-cognition dualism. Some people believe that it is almost immoral
> to think ("intellectualize") during tragedies like we all faced. I do
> not think that thinking is "cold" by definition. Moreover, if one
> refuses to think someone does it for him or her. I'm not comfortable
> when currently "thinking" is mainly done by "political experts" and
> politicians. I think we should engage in public/civic dialogue before
> rushing in "the war of the XXI century".
>
> What do you think?
>
> Eugene
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Angel Lin [mailto:ENANGEL@cityu.edu.hk]
> > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:42 AM
> > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > Subject: Re: tragedy in New York
> >
> > Dear Everybody,
> >
> > I really felt shocked and sad for what happened--saw it just minutes
> after
> > the event on Hong Kong TV--couldn't believe it at first, and
> immediately
> > hoped that members in the xmca community are well and alive.
> >
> > Eugene is right--it's an extremely violent way of communication, if it
> can
> > be seen as communication at all, by those who somehow felt/thought
> that
> > they had exhausted all other peaceful ways of communication. Mike, I
> have
> > to point out the danger of your metaphor, though--perhaps it's
> precisely
> > the (irrational, unjustified?) feeling of being positioned as
> "children"
> > (in relation to US) that has motivated such an inhuman way of
> communication
> > to make a statement about their position in the world?
> >
> > In mourning...
> > Angel
> >
> > At 01:18 PM 9/11/01 -0700, you wrote:
> > >I don't think its difficult to understand why the people who carried
> out
> > >these acts of destruction, and many to come, did what they did.
> > >
> > >It never ceases to amaze me how convinced we are that God is on our
> side,
> > >so we are not only justified, but morally required, to act in such
> ways.
> > >
> > >I shudder to think of the sequalia, with the bloodbath in the middle
> east
> > >as a ready-to-hand model.
> > >
> > >One of the few clear generalizations from the developmental
> literature
> > >on the use of physical punishment with children is that it creates
> more
> > >violent children...... just to bring the conversation down to a level
> > >where I have some professional competence.
> > >
> > >Meantime, I am waiting to hear from friends in New York whose
> children
> > >just may have been working downtown today.
> > >
> > >mike
> > >
> > >
> > ***************************************************************
> > Angel Lin, Ph.D.(Ontario Institute for Studies in Education,
> > University of Toronto)
> > Assistant Professor, Department of English and Communication
> > City University of Hong Kong
> > Tat Chee Ave., Kowloon, Hong Kong
> > Fax: (852) 2788-8894; phone: (852) 2788-8122
> > E-mail: enangel@cityu.edu.hk
> > http://www.cityu.edu.hk/en/staff/angel/angel.html
> > http://www.tesl-hk.org.hk
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 10 2001 - 15:49:14 PDT