[lit-ideas] Re: Comments on Stans articles

LH wrote:
"...have been downtrodden by someone or something.  Modern Psychology assures 
us they are not responsible for their own actions."

ck: This sentiment is a complete misreading of psychology in a social context. 
Responsibility for one's actions is distinct from the myriad contributing 
factors that may cause individuals to commit crimes. But conflating these two 
concepts--contributing causes and personal responsibility--is a favorite 
pasttime of people who want to eliminate all societal responsibility for events.

Carol



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lawrence Helm 
  To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 7:54 PM
  Subject: [lit-ideas] Comments on Stans articles


  Phil,



  My take on Stan's last two articles:



  Both the articles that are the occasion of your objection illustrate 
something very important, that the conflict we are witnessing is between a 
Liberal Democracy and forces that favor tyrannical authoritarianism*.  The 
Lebanese girl isn't exaggerating when she says that if she were to be a Jew 
asking similar help under similar circumstances from the Jihadists, she would 
be killed and they would think they had done a good thing by killing an 
infidel.  We read about such things in the newspapers, often by 
Leftist-oriented reporters who excuse the abuses because the Muslims 
perpetrating them have been downtrodden by someone or something.  Modern 
Psychology assures us they are not responsible for their own actions.



  The other article, the Haaretz editorial draws our attention at a broader 
level to the same thing: a Liberal Democracy is fighting against the forces of 
tyrannical authoritarianism*, in this case Militant Islam in the form of a 
Terrorist organization (two if we count Hamas) bent upon their destruction.  
What good is a cease fire?  What good is a peace treaty with a force that has 
sworn your destruction?  Let them say first that they recognize Israel's right 
to exist and then talk about a peace treaty.  Can there be peace between you 
and someone who has sworn to kill you?



  Militant Islam has incorporated the worst characteristics of European 
anti-Semitism into their anti-Israel campaign.  They treat the Protocols of 
Zion as though they represented fact.  Who is ignorant enough not to know the 
Protocols of Zion is a fiction?  There is no excuse for anyone in this modern 
age to pretend that the Protocols of Zion are fact.  While there is no excuse, 
a force that is authoritarian and tyrannical can lie to its people and convince 
them that the Protocols of Zion is fact.  Also, they treat the Holocaust as a 
fiction.  It is interesting that many in the Europe that in bygone days was the 
home of so much anti-Semitism have warmed up to these Militant tyrannical 
authoritarians as they exhibit the old-fashioned anti-Semitism to a remarkable 
degree.  This is one of the disgusting elements in this modern struggle, but it 
is after all a mere distraction.  The Militant Islamists would soon feel the 
same way about Denmark should those happy people and Israel be able to change 
places.  



  Israel is a Liberal Democracy and is indeed on the front lines of this 
struggle against Militant Islam.  There can be no moral equivalency in this 
regard.  Militant Islam must be opposed especially wherever it is doing what it 
was designed to do -- fighting against any infidel or nation of infidels, 
especially Liberal Democracies.  They don't want peace and they don't want 
truces or peace treaties unless they need a break from their ongoing relentless 
campaign to destroy all infidels.





  *  Some here love to quibble about words or expressions, but the difficulty 
with being able to use one term to fit all that Militant Islam is and is 
mounting in the way of aggression against the West, against the US, against 
Israel, and against infidels is endemic in the nature of Militant Islam itself. 
 They don't want to use one expression unless it is "Islam."  They don't think 
of themselves as a sect.  They are engaging in what Islam urges them to do.  
The Jihad is part of their religion and they are being true to it and the names 
the west uses like "Islamism,"  "Militant Islam," "Islamic Fundamentalism," and 
"Jihadism" are signs of the West's ignorance.  They are merely being Muslims, 
no more and no less.  For the purposes of this note I have used an expression, 
Tyrannical Authoritarianism, that is an attribute of their ideology.  Their 
Islam admits of no other authority.  It demands compliance with the Sharia.  
Thus a wounded Jew if captured by Hezbollah or other Jihadists would be killed 
in compliance with Islam (as they see Islam).  It is also being true to Islam 
in its unending relentless attempts to destroy the Infidels inhabiting the 
nation, which they don't consider a nation, called Israel.





  Lawrence







  -----Original Message-----
  From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf Of Phil Enns
  Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 6:03 PM
  To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subject: [lit-ideas] A Favour Please



  I would like to ask a favour from those who contribute to the list.

  Please don't post articles or parts of articles without commenting.



  I ask this for two related reasons.  First, I am part of this list

  because I am interested in hearing what the others on this list have to

  say about whatever topics are of interest.  I want to hear what Omar or

  Stan or Lawrence think, not some talking head.  There are plenty of

  services that collect articles and editorials so this list need not.



  Second, an article posted without comment leaves me wondering about the

  relationship between the content of the article and the poster.  Does

  Omar, or Stan, agree with the whole article, parts of it, and which?

  Tell me if the article reflects your understanding and if you disagree

  at points, why?



  I have begun deleting posts that appear to be comprised of forwarded

  articles.  This isn't because I am not interested in the topics but

  rather because reading them defeats the purpose of my belonging to this

  list.   May I suggest providing comments and then either pasting parts

  of the article or linking to it.  This may not always be appropriate but

  I would appreciate it.  Thank you.



  Sincerely,



  Phil Enns

  Toronto, ON

Other related posts: