[extropy-chat] Islamic morons win yet again

[Eugen Leitl]

On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:37:24PM -0500, Brandon Reinhart wrote:

>    This is probably an exaggerated reaction on the part of the opera
>    house after the Danish Mohammad cartoons incident. In that situation

They followed a security recommendation. That was a good thing in
the end, because it made a few people mad, and initiated a public debate.
A 3% minority has no business dictating frankly medieval values to their
host culture. I'm unhappy that the result was a mealy-mouthed
"invitation to dialogue" and that the local culture has its own
religious bias to start with. More feed on the brown mills.
Don't the local folks realize that the nonvoters are a majority,
and that so-called major parties are not major anymore?

I'm thinking a crackdown on systems of belief with a conflicting
value system to secular humanism is overdue. The barbarians are 
at the gates. There is no point in exercising nuance and diplomacy.

>    extremists manipulated foreign reaction with false material (including
>    cartoons that weren't part of what was originally published) to drum
>    up anti-Western and anti-Danish sentiment. The resulting rioting led

That's not the point. The newcomers are starting to dictate their
values to their hosts using scare tactics.  

>    to a few deaths. I could see something similar happening with this

If you're not willing to risk your life when fighting for your values
your values are not worth very much.

>    opera or any number of other like things. Just imagine the extremist
>    Imam, telling his flock that the Germans have shown an opera where an
>    actor marches about with the severed head of the prophet! (Carefully
>    not mentioning the fact that the dismember bits of other religions'
>    leaders are also on display.)

Who cares what some extremist somewhere might do? If you start self-censorship
proactively, the terrorists *have* won a very real victory. The extremists
should fear for their lives, not us. 
 
>    But for that scenario to play out, there has to be someone there
>    intending to use the opera's presence as a political/ideological
>    weapon. (There was in the case of the cartoons.) The more businesses
>    stand up to that kind of manipulation, the less effective it will be.

It's not the business, it's a case of the culture and the political
society. If the political society fails to address the problem effectively,
the voters will not be amused.

>    If we're afraid that foreign cultures will riot over an expression of
>    our own culture (a literary one at that!) we're playing exactly into
>    the hands of the extremists.

Exactly.
 
>    > You're wrong, change your thinking to my view" is rarely an
>    effective way to influence someone.
> 
>    Challenging someone's beliefs whether directly or with subtlety can be
>    a very effective way to influence someone. Even insulting someone's
>    beliefs can be effective. (The UK punk movement was based on that!)
>    That being said, I read John K Clark's comment as a "this is fucked
>    up!" kind of frustration thing, not an insult to the religious
>    believers on this list.

I don't care about manipulating behaviour of groups adhering to irrational
cults. I don't want them to ruin my local community by their actions, 
period. In a democratic society a minority has to follow the rules, or
get out of the game. A way to avoid such problems altogether is a
selective immigration policy established early. That has been botched,
however. Now the problem has moved inside the compartment, and has
become much, much more difficult to treatment. 
 
>    Ø      I would suggest that if you really wanted to disinfect a
>    particular strain of religious belief that you would have to

There's usually no cure, if you're infected. Your only chance is
prevention. Once the parasite latches upon the host, it's too late.
As the Jesuits said, get them while they're still young.

>    understand the behavior of the meme in much the same way the
>    biological viral activity is studied before it can be effectively
>    countered with drugs.

Unfortunately, there is no cure, and the rate of spontaenous remissions
is negligible.
 
>    I would think that trying to cure religion with some engineering-like
>    method (drugs, surgery, bullet in the head) would be morally dangerous
>    (whether voluntary or not). You'd just end up with a variation on a
>    thought-control society. Maybe one intending to be benevolent, but

I disagree. If a particular belief system makes people commit
fratricide (a brother killing a supposedly defiled sister), then
this belief system is evil, and has no place in a civilized
society. I'm not singling out any particular belief system, it's just
there's just one case that is egregious, and need to be eradicated.
If this will not happen, it indicates that the immune system of the
host is compromised.

>    you're still belief-redacting. I'd argue that trying to change
>    someone's belief through horribly offensive insults is more moral than

Can you cite any references for this supposed method to work?

>    providing them with a truth pill. Although, with the bullet in the
>    head approach I guess you don't need to know so much about how the
>    meme, or the biology of belief works, which is a plus.

I genuinely hope your bullet to the head approach is only rhetorical.
 
>    Maybe the best way to address the problem of conflicting beliefs and
>    their effects on society is good old fashioned rational debate.

No. Rational debates don't work if the other party is not rational.
It's like trying to play a game where one party can break the rules
at will. The democracy has to deal with the problem while it is still
linked to a minority. The only way to prevent a global pandemic is
that.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060929/4c9447fb/attachment.bin>