Words Have Consequences: Henry II to Clay County Kentucky?
Legend says Henry II, the first king to call himself the King of England rather than King of the English, intemperately blurted out to four loyal knights, "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" His actual statement may have been closer to "What miserable drones and traitors have I nurtured and promoted in my household who let their lord be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric!" And thus did the four knights ride off into infamy, and Thomas Becket achieve martyrdom. When the high-born, the famous, and the powerful are brought low at the hands of knavish assassins we mourn collectively, deeply, and nationally.
We've grieved for four presidents, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy. For Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and for former Attorney General Robert Kennedy. Terrifying attempts were made by the deranged and deluded on the lives of Andrew Jackson, on Theodore Roosevelt, on Franklin D. Roosevelt, on Harry Truman, on Gerald Ford, on Ronald Reagan. None of these attacks were perpetrated by a cast of thousands, but with the exception of the Truman attack, by single individuals whose delusions gave them the authority to attack figures to whom their attention had been drawn and focused. For these assaults we grieved at the successes and breathed deep relief for those ultimately unsuccessful. However, what if the targets are not the high born, the famous, or the powerful?
What if the target was the 16th Street Baptist Church of Birmingham, Alabama on September 15, 1963 and the victims were Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson, and Cynthia Wesley? They died at the hands of KKK bombers for no other reason than they happened to members of a church serving as a focal and organizing point for the modern civil rights movement.
What if the target was the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City? At 9:02 AM, April 19, 1995 a Ryder rental truck/bomb killed 168 people in the building and injured more than 680 others. What if some of those victims were perfectly innocent children in the day care center? Right wing conspiracy theorist and devotee of the racist "Turner Diaries" Timothy McVeigh would be convicted and executed for this heinous crime, saying before he died that he was sorry about the children, but they were "collateral damage."
What if the targets were people from all over the globe watching, enjoying, and celebrating the Olympic Games in Atlanta, GA? Do we remember that Alice Hawthorne, of Albany, GA died when part of the bomb set by Eric Rudolph sent a nail into her head at 1:20 AM on July 27, 1996? Rudolph "explained" his horrendous attack by saying the games celebrated "global socialism," and he wanted to attack an "abominable government that sanctioned abortion on demand."
SOME PEOPLE are robots, helpless to make their own choices?
I agree there is responsibility when you are a trusted "source" of information not to abuse how you present that information to achieve a certain outcome; violence is terrorism is easiest to execute, hardest to recover from without more of the same.
But I insist that the responsibility lies most strongly with the person wielding the axe, not the guy who made the axe.
9. no, i don't side with fatalism at all- i am simply pointing out
that people can feed either wolf.
Inciting hatred and discord harvests a bad crop.
Encouraging people to choose the better angels- yields somewhat less negative outcomes.
When the people in this society preach hatred and fear- when we are constantly being encouraged to "not trust the government" (which IS "us" in reality) when toting around guns to social gatherings is depicted as patriotic- brave- bold-, when lies even dis-proven lies are carried around by loud voices and used to alienate and divide US,("socialist"-"liar"-"next Hitler") "the wolf" that destroys and kills is being fed.
Would it be fair of me to think you don't believe people who pay to have others killed should be held responsible? Do you believe Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney and others shouldn't be held responsible for the deaths their words have caused?
If I tell someone that the person approaching me in a dark alley has a gun was going to kill me, and you respond by killing them first, do I not have responsibility?
We can't encourage someone to do something, and then blame them for doing it, with a "who me" expression on our faces- Can we??
I get that if you are a high priest you will be surrounded by people for whom payment is your praise.
But as a high king (so to speak) my experience is that the people who surround you are there for pay.
Isn't it odd then that the people who elect to receive payment for doing evil are somehow more evil than the people who are being evil for moral reasons?
I agree there are "aggravating" circumstances, including master manipulators and professional sheep, but ultimately it boils down to CHOICE. If people don't have a choice about being manipulated then they're like sharks in the ocean. If they don't eat you they'll eat someone, sharks aren't evil or immoral. It's the hunger in the shark's belly that's evil.
I have to go with 99 to the nines blame on the one who did it, not the one who said to did it or paid to did it. Force people to be responsible for the choices they make, and you make them more human, not less human.
1. Could you please reiterate the OP topic and what you found objectionable enough in my reply to require an ad hominem attack?
2. If you're just looking for witticisms to adapt for your own blog, just ask me nicely instead of making yourself the hapless target. I find nothing of use in yours, by the way. Maybe geritol would make you wittier.
If you get there look around, it's full of people looking for leadership who lack the information or cognition to evaluate the quality of that leadership.
3. While that is true, the words may well have emboldened the doers.
Incitement to Riot is a crime in most jursdictions. Morally and ethically, encouraging others to do violence is just wrong, plain and simple.
"Let's you and him fight" is the byword of the 101st Keyboard Warriors. Unwilling to do violence themselves, they foment it in others. Cowardly people have done this since the dawn of human existence, and many people have died because of it.
It's easy to say what you have said. If you truly believe it, I am very sorry for you.
It's easy to blather on about how when Rush Limpballs incites his idiot horde to violence it's Rush's fault just because you need a devil with a name for your evils, and you did blather oh Keyboard Strategist.
You don't sound like a real liberal. You sound like a professional victim, willing to blame all of society for your ills, but not the dude who shanked you for your wallet.
If you truly believe that, you don't require pity, you require medication.
11. Oh, you have cut me to the quick with your rapier-like wit.
Edited on Thu Sep-24-09 02:11 PM by MineralMan
Will I recover from those grievous wounds or was your weapon only half sharp? Rush isn't guilty of the crime, nor is Beck. I did not say they were. They're guilty only of inciting the crime. That's guilty enough to deserve a share of the blame.
As for my liberal credentials, your opinion of them is not particularly desired.
So what is the moral burden of the murderers if they believe their own lives to be at stake if they don't comply? What about their livelihoods? In some societies there is no difference - no income, your daughters are prostitutes and your sons can't marry end of gene line.
Is our moral emphasis on choice versus obligation really morally superior, or just fashionable?
Maybe I missed the nuance, but I thought we were speaking in general terms. The reformation apparently did not influence Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Ahmedinejad, KJL or Bush Junior, and their minions. It did not impact Manson or Koresh.
This thread started off to be a decent discussion of accountability versus responsibility, but it seems every monkey that swung in from the rafters to reply has had to do it in the least engaging way possible.
Now then perfesser of histery, tell me what in HELL the reformation has to do with this thread or with anything I said. And all that.
24. did you come here to discuss or to flounce off?
and all that.
This is DU. The M.O. here is that we assume some bit friendliness first. The low posters tend to swing in from the rafters and assault DU veterans like myself as a form of discussion. What's wrong with just making your point?
The lesson learned for you is that posturing leads to flouncing, on your part, and it could have all been much more civil.
21. Same stuff applies to the use of homophobic hate preachers
such as Donnie McClurkin, by Barack Obama. They speak hate, Donnie accused the gay community of being child killers, Obama called Donnie a 'good, decent and moral person' and continued to use him. The constant violence against GLBT people, especially minority GLBT people, is connected to the words of such people as McClurkin, Caldwell, the women in 'Sister, Sister' and other speakers of hateful bigotry and invective who promoted Senator Obama for President. It is not just them. It is also Democrats who engage in this dangerous and bloody game. Pointing fingers at others when you yourself are guilty of the same thing is just hypocrisy. Nothing more. There is no Party that stands on righteous ground on this issue. Dismount the high horse and begin to make change please.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.