Can we talk about preventing terrorism or other tragedies without getting political?

ThisBougieLife

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Jan 21, 2016
2,010
6,336
SF Bay Area, California
There are often complaints when a thread about an attack (terrorist or not) is posted it immediately becomes political, and that this is bad.

So my question is: what should we talk about instead? Should we only offer condolences? Surely condolences are nice to see—a bit of humanity. But if we want to talk about preventing further tragedies (and who doesn’t want to prevent them) doesn’t this immediately guarantee the discussion will become political?

Is there a way for it to become political, but not in a negative way? I guess I’m just wondering how pragmatic and reasonable it is to try to avoid “politicizing” a tragedy when it seems to be somewhat necessary if we hope to discuss anything in depth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TonyC28

mudslag

macrumors regular
Oct 18, 2010
139
9,917
Don't think so.. At some stage, it will always get political. The best you could hope for is "not as much"

That's because terrorism is political at least in part. Terrorism revolves around two main factors, religion and politics, be it one side or both. While a good portion of the motivation of terrorism might be religious based, how the other side treats it is often politically motivated.

So to answer the OPs question, no you can't talk about terrorism without talking about politics.
 

citizenzen

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2010
1,433
11,628
There is no way to prevent terrorist attacks.

The only thing you can hope to do is minimize them by providing people with more attractive alternatives
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeeGood

sorcery

macrumors regular
Mar 27, 2016
179
363
Ring of Fire
Staying out of Islamic conflicts might be worth a try. And that is political.
Although strangely we are not being attacked by the Palestinian factions these days. Perhaps they're resting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zenithal

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Jul 29, 2008
45,429
30,689
The Far Horizon
There are often complaints when a thread about an attack (terrorist or not) is posted it immediately becomes political, and that this is bad.

So my question is: what should we talk about instead? Should we only offer condolences? Surely condolences are nice to see—a bit of humanity. But if we want to talk about preventing further tragedies (and who doesn’t want to prevent them) doesn’t this immediately guarantee the discussion will become political?

Is there a way for it to become political, but not in a negative way? I guess I’m just wondering how pragmatic and reasonable it is to try to avoid “politicizing” a tragedy when it seems to be somewhat necessary if we hope to discuss anything in depth.
No.

(In answer to your thread title).

And this is simply because "terrorism" is profoundly political by its very nature.

This is what distinguishes it from common, or garden, criminality, or criminal actions, (such as, let us say, extortion, robbery, murder) which it may resemble initially but from which it differs because the motivation that drives it is different.

Thus, the aims of terrorism are invariably political - while the means adopted to achieve these aims are often unusually violent.

It is an attack on a state, or a 'political culture' or an ideology - something that is, by its nature - political - that expresses its complete opposition and utter antagonism to that state, empire, ideology, political culture, by way of violence - asymmetrical violence - which it excuses to itself (using religion, or ideology, or some other 'higher' justification to do so) - rather than by way of the ballot box and the use of standard political platforms, methods and means.

And to say it is "bad" that such discussions turn political immediately, why shouldn't they, as this is the very nature of the thing? To deny that it is political (although fought with the weapons of terror) is to run the risk of missing the point completely.
 
Last edited:

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,542
7,801
CT
Terrorism will always be political because politicians use it as an excuse to spend money fighting terrorism and strengthening laws against innocent people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cwosigns

linuxcooldude

macrumors 68020
Mar 1, 2010
2,470
4,170
Terrorism will always be political because politicians use it as an excuse to spend money fighting terrorism and strengthening laws against innocent people.
The truck driver came into the country on a diversity visa, by lottery. Was he so innocent when he was running people down? Good grief, give me a break.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iapplelove

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,542
7,801
CT
The truck driver came into the country on a diversity visa, by lottery. Was he so innocent when he was running people down? Good grief, give me a break.
The OP asked if we can talk about terrorism without getting political, I said no. Now, we have another thread where we can discuss this incident.
 

pdqgp

macrumors 68020
Mar 23, 2010
2,130
5,432
Not likely as many of the prevention methods are going to involve policies that one side or another either supports or doesn't.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Nov 14, 2011
20,652
22,316
Impossible. And I guess now these 8 people are dead because of Chuck Schumer. Not even 24 hours since the event happened and the President is already on the attack on Twitter (and also letting us know he’s getting his news from Fox and Friends not his national security team. Btw, this diversity visa lottery program was passed in 1990 with bipartisan support and signed into law by George Bush. But now it’s a Democrat lottery system.


Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
11/1/17, 6:24 AM
The terrorist came into our country through what is called the "Diversity Visa Lottery Program," a Chuck Schumer beauty. I want merit based.

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
11/1/17, 6:40 AM
"Senator Chuck Schumer helping to import Europes problems" said Col.Tony Shaffer. We will stop this craziness! @foxandfriends

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
11/1/17, 6:30 AM
We are fighting hard for Merit Based immigration, no more Democrat Lottery Systems. We must get MUCH tougher (and smarter). @foxandfriends
Of course both the Left and Right are wrong about this. The Right says we can’t talk about guns and the LEFT says we can’t talk about immigration.
 
Last edited:

Herdfan

macrumors 6502
Apr 11, 2011
267
3,842
As long as the two main sides differ on the root cause, it will always be political.
 

citizenzen

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2010
1,433
11,628
As long as the two main sides differ on the root cause, it will always be political.
What do you believe is the root cause of terrorism? It can’t be Islam, because plenty of terrorists aren’t Islamic.

It would seem to me that the root cause is some form of mental illness that allows a person to rationalize violence over peaceful means for affecting political change.

If you can find the root to that, as well as a way to change those conditions, you are a far smarter person than I.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Nov 14, 2011
20,652
22,316
What do you believe is the root cause of terrorism? It can’t be Islam, because plenty of terrorists aren’t Islamic.

It would seem to me that the root cause is some form of mental illness that allows a person to rationalize violence over peaceful means for affecting political change.

If you can find the root to that, as well as a way to change those conditions, you are a far smarter person than I.
There is no way to stop evil from existing. Period.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,590
24,485
Texas
No.

(In answer to your thread title).

And this is simply because "terrorism" is profoundly political by its very nature.

This is what distinguishes it from common, or garden, criminality, or criminal actions, (such as, let us say, extortion, robbery, murder) which it may resemble initially but from which it differs because the motivation that drives it is different.

Thus, the aims of terrorism are invariably political - while the means adopted to achieve these aims are often unusually violent.

It is an attack on a state, or a 'political culture' or an ideology - something that is, by its nature - political - that expresses its complete opposition and utter antagonism to that state, empire, ideology, political culture, by way of violence - asymmetrical violence - which it excuses to itself (using religion, or ideology, or some other 'higher' justification to do so) - rather than by way of the ballot box and the use of standard political platforms, methods and means.

And to say it is "bad" that such discussions turn political immediately, why shouldn't they, as this is the very nature of the thing? To deny that it is political (although fought with the weapons of terror) is to run the risk of missing the point completely.
I agree 250% with you (on PRSI!!! The stars must be aligned)
I was going to write a similar post, but your explanation is simply perfect.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,367
UK
What do you believe is the root cause of terrorism? It can’t be Islam, because plenty of terrorists aren’t Islamic.

It would seem to me that the root cause is some form of mental illness that allows a person to rationalize violence over peaceful means for affecting political change.

If you can find the root to that, as well as a way to change those conditions, you are a far smarter person than I.
I think inequality is part of the issue.
 

PracticalMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 22, 2009
2,745
3,706
Houston, TX
Impossible. And I guess now these 8 people are dead because of Chuck Schumer. Not even 24 hours since the event happened and the President is already on the attack on Twitter (and also letting us know he’s getting his news from Fox and Friends not his national security team. Btw, this diversity visa lottery program was passed in 1990 with bipartisan support and signed into law by George Bush. But now it’s a Democrat lottery system.
On top of that, Uzbekistan is an Asian country, just north of Afghanistan (clue: the "stan" in name)

Once again Trump shows to the world how low his intelligence is.
 

Peterkro

macrumors 68020
Aug 17, 2004
2,143
1,361
Communard de Londres,Tiocfaidh ár lá
No.

(In answer to your thread title).

And this is simply because "terrorism" is profoundly political by its very nature.

This is what distinguishes it from common, or garden, criminality, or criminal actions, (such as, let us say, extortion, robbery, murder) which it may resemble initially but from which it differs because the motivation that drives it is different.

Thus, the aims of terrorism are invariably political - while the means adopted to achieve these aims are often unusually violent.

It is an attack on a state, or a 'political culture' or an ideology - something that is, by its nature - political - that expresses its complete opposition and utter antagonism to that state, empire, ideology, political culture, by way of violence - asymmetrical violence - which it excuses to itself (using religion, or ideology, or some other 'higher' justification to do so) - rather than by way of the ballot box and the use of standard political platforms, methods and means.

And to say it is "bad" that such discussions turn political immediately, why shouldn't they, as this is the very nature of the thing? To deny that it is political (although fought with the weapons of terror) is to run the risk of missing the point completely.
Is terrorism restricted to non state actors (see the well used phrase "the so-called Islamic state")?From a objective view all the major terrorist organisations are states.Russia,U.K.,China and above all others the U.S. (many others of course).
 

mac_in_tosh

macrumors 6502
Nov 6, 2016
351
4,553
Earth
Every day on average about 200 Americans are killed or wounded by gunfire. Our government appears to be content with that but POTUS has already tweeted multiple times about this incident, which I by no means wish to minimize. It seems if something is labeled political/religious terrorism it gets way more government and media attention than the far greater threat that we live under each day.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Nov 14, 2011
20,652
22,316
On top of that, Uzbekistan is an Asian country, just north of Afghanistan (clue: the "stan" in name)

Once again Trump shows to the world how low his intelligence is.
Jeff Flake responded to Trump. :D


Jeff Flake (@JeffFlake)
11/1/17, 7:36 AM
Actually, the Gang of 8, including @SenSchumer, did away with the Diversity Visa Program as part of broader reforms. I know, I was there

Jeff Flake (@JeffFlake)
11/1/17, 8:19 AM
In fact, had the Senate Gang of 8 bill passed the House, it would have ended the Visa Lottery Program AND increased merit based visas.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 0007776