Comments on: New York Times: Joe Stack Was Right

By: tdaxp

tdaxp — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:57:19 +0000

Rob,

“State terrorism” is a nonsense term. States compel through violence. That is why they are states. If you wish to live in a world before the emergence of states, hope into your time machine and visit Europe before the peace of Westphalia. Very few people would wish to join you.

By: Rob

Rob — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:03:33 +0000

People talk endlessly about non-state terrorism but seldom speak of state terrorism. Military terrorism as sometimes practiced by the US military, Israeli military ect has slaughtered millions of civilians. As Robert B. Asprey (Vietnam veteran and historian) pointed out in his genius book War In The Shadows The Guerrilla In History “western nations have a long history of hypocrisy in the use of force.” He also says :” Much of what politicians, generals, and the media call terrorism is actually counter terrorism, a reaction to military terrorism.

By: tdaxp » Blog Archive » The Affordances of Domestic Terror

tdaxp » Blog Archive » The Affordances of Domestic Terror — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:54:37 +0000

[...] New York Times: Joe Stack Was Right [...]

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:47:20 +0000

Curtis,
I still don’t follow what you’re saying. Flying a plane in to a building to destroy lives is an extreme act of violence. Joe Stack left a written statement documenting his frustrations and intention.

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:11:47 +0000

Lol well Tim, you now have me wondering at the difference between extreme violence and mere violence. Also, I’m now pondering the significance of what you might call, violent statements? I’m not at all sure that J.S. was “making a statement”, or at least wonder whether a different characterization of his action would be more useful for understanding the significance of these things.

I take it that your main point is: 1. terrorism is terrorism, and, since 2. terrorism is necessarily an evil, then 3. evil is evil.

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 03:25:11 +0000

Curtis,
I don’t follow. I think you’re taking my statement too far. My point is that Joe Stack used extreme violence on innocents to express a political statement – that’s called terrorism. Islamic extremists use extreme violence on innocents to express political statements – also terrorism.

There’s nothing to celebrate about either.

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:50:11 +0000

“What I find fascinating (and depressing) is that some Americans view Joe Stack as an “American Patriot” or “hero”. Which is a straight-up endorsement of terrorism against the US Government, no different than endorsing the methods and madness of Islamic extremism.”

Tim, there is so much wrong with your statement, I’m not sure I should even begin. Are you equating patriotism with support of the US Government, so that the two occur together, and always together? Are you equating all other targets of Islamic extremism (mosques, foreign governments, etc.) with the US Government?

By: Jeffrey James

Jeffrey James — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:32:50 +0000

I didn’t say it wasn’t a serious point, I was only being satirical.

By: tdaxp

tdaxp — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:10:43 +0000

Tim,

“Terrorism is terrorism” is a tautology. Its true, but the statement has no meaning beyond simple truth.

Joe Stack belongs to that class of American politicians, such as John Brown and Martin Luther King, willing to execute violence as a means of political power. Unlike King, but like Brown, he was willing to kill others as a result of that execution of power.

Too bad that so many American youth are taught to admire political violence in our system. I understand why (the political myth of MLK is incredibly useful in some ways), but its still sickening.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:55:43 +0000

Because your post suggests that terrorism is terrorism, regardless. And that the President should say such. I agree.

What I find fascinating (and depressing) is that some Americans view Joe Stack as an “American Patriot” or “hero”. Which is a straight-up endorsement of terrorism against the US Government, no different than endorsing the methods and madness of Islamic extremism.