Interesting Iranian response

[TheEarl]

They're not primarily upset about cartoons; the cartoons are a flashpoint. Sort of like the countries of Europe weren't really that invested in Archduke Ferdinand himself.

The horsey gets the award for the most apposite and brilliantly expressed opinion in a single sentence.

The Earl

 

[Svenskaflicka]

As I've said here.

I read that, yes, but I'm afraid Swedes today know so little about their inheritage that if you showed a teenager a caricature of Leif Eriksson, they wouldn't recognize him.

And if you told them it was Leif Eriksson, they'd stare dumbstruck at you for a while, before venturing "what team does he play for?"

 

[Svenskaflicka]

The horsey gets the award for the most apposite and brilliantly expressed opinion in a single sentence.

The Earl

Horsey always says intelligent things.

 

[BlackShanglan]

It could be just me, but the rage has gotten old. When your collective response to every single slight, no matter how trivial, is violent, it looses an power to make an impression. That isn't to say acts of violence have lost their power to appall. But in the case of "the Arab Street" the violence and protests have lost any relation to the affront,whatever it might be.

I saw back and forth on this. Yes, the violence does eat away at any ability to empathize with the people committing it - or with those who happen to live in the same country and are trying to avoid the violence. But if the situation hasn't changed, why would we expect their reaction to? If they are in a state of constant anxiety and deprivation, at what point have they had the chance to regroup, take a metaphorical breath, and try to get a more objective view of things? And if life is made cheap, how can we expect people to respect it? There's nothing like poverty and disenfranchisement to make people gradually lose respect for their own lives. Once they do, there's not much hope that they will care about someone else's.

I suppose I should put that in context by saying that that is what I think is likely to happen. I don't mean that I think it a good thing, or the right thing - but it's hardly an unpredictable thing. That violence is not the answer I think the ultimate truth; one only has to look to history to see that terrorism and domestic violence almost never achieve their goals, and often achieve the opposite. Nonviolent protest has more going for it than morality alone; it's a damned sight more effective. But rage, pain, resentment, and frustration are powerful emotions, and it's a remarkable leader who can bring a people past them to do more than engage in eye-for-an-eye reprisals.

(And thank you, The Earl; you're much too kind.)

 

[hunting_tiger]

I read that, yes, but I'm afraid Swedes today know so little about their inheritage that if you showed a teenager a caricature of Leif Eriksson, they wouldn't recognize him.

And if you told them it was Leif Eriksson, they'd stare dumbstruck at you for a while, before venturing "what team does he play for?"

Leif Eriksson has played in Djurgården, Sirius, Örebro and Nice apart from the national team.

 

[hunting_tiger]

No, I mean, "what beloved Swedish icon should be ridiculed in order to piss us off"?

McKenna, we're ALREADY making fun of the Norwegians..!

Björne or Foppa ?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I saw back and forth on this. Yes, the violence does eat away at any ability to empathize with the people committing it - or with those who happen to live in the same country and are trying to avoid the violence. But if the situation hasn't changed, why would we expect their reaction to? If they are in a state of constant anxiety and deprivation, at what point have they had the chance to regroup, take a metaphorical breath, and try to get a more objective view of things? And if life is made cheap, how can we expect people to respect it? There's nothing like poverty and disenfranchisement to make people gradually lose respect for their own lives. Once they do, there's not much hope that they will care about someone else's.

I suppose I should put that in context by saying that that is what I think is likely to happen. I don't mean that I think it a good thing, or the right thing - but it's hardly an unpredictable thing. That violence is not the answer I think the ultimate truth; one only has to look to history to see that terrorism and domestic violence almost never achieve their goals, and often achieve the opposite. Nonviolent protest has more going for it than morality alone; it's a damned sight more effective. But rage, pain, resentment, and frustration are powerful emotions, and it's a remarkable leader who can bring a people past them to do more than engage in eye-for-an-eye reprisals.

(And thank you, The Earl; you're much too kind.)

To me, it has lost any message, other than we are violent, fucked up people.

If your normally good natured dog snaps at you, you worry. You want to make sure he is all right, since the action is out of character. If the semi-feral pitbull your roomate calls a pet snaps at you, you probably notice, but don't worry youirself with the why of it.

I think they have reached a state where they are like the pitbull. People don't care why they are snapping, it's expected, they just try to stay out of the way.

 

[McKenna]

McKenna, we're ALREADY making fun of the Norwegians..!

You're right. That was too obvious a target.