We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Stop calling what happened in Kenya a ‘tragedy’…

Stop calling what happened in Kenya a ‘tragedy‘. A bridge collapsing is a tragedy. A house burning down is a tragedy. Dying from Ebola is a tragedy. What happened at Garissa University in north-eastern Kenya was an atrocity. People did this on purpose.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on TumblrShare on RedditShare on Google+Share on VKEmail this to someone

14 comments to Stop calling what happened in Kenya a ‘tragedy’…

  • It’s not owning as such. It is allowing them to own under T&C. T&C that are good not just for them but for everyone!

  • PersonFromPorlock

    But ‘atrocity’ implies responsibility, and responsibility is out. We are now far too sophisticated not to know that all actors are victims of circumstances. The logical end of this is that someday people who shoot politicians will be able to look forward to receiving psychiatric care instead of retribution.

    Oh, wait….

  • lucklucky

    You can be sure it would have been called an atrocity if it was done by white men and or right wing.

  • the other rob

    It seems to me that the nature of the metacontext is such that, if one is not paying close attention, it can slip right by one. The use of the word “tragedy” in cases such as this would be an example.

    I can’t help but think, however, when we get the likes of al Shabbab or the Daesh doing this kind of evil shit, surely there’s a humanitarian duty that demands that all right thinking people should head over there post haste and murder the fucking bastards.

  • Paul Marks

    Agreed Perry.

    This was deliberate mass murder of Christians by warriors of Islam – at Easter time.

    Yet the P.C. (“Critical Theory”) ruling elite of the West (that control the education system, the media, and governments) imply that it was something else.

    To admit the truth, to admit objective reality, about either this attack or the last 14 centuries of Islamic attacks – well that would be against Progressive doctrine.

  • The Other Rob:

    I can’t help but think, however, when we get the likes of al Shabbab or the Daesh doing this kind of evil shit, surely there’s a humanitarian duty that demands that all right thinking people should head over there post haste and murder the fucking bastards.

    Such an act is a homicide and even a necessary homicide but it is not murder.

  • the other rob

    Leslie Bates: Depending upon the minutiae, you may be correct. But one can’t always rely upon legal minutiae. The question then becomes, is one willing to carry out such an act, given that it might be ruled to be murder.

    I’m thinking about starting a kicksarter campaign, to test that proposition.

  • […] SamizdataStop calling what happened in Kenya a ‘tragedy’…April 4, 2015 […]

  • My comment here should have been on the French model thread. Sorry!

    Paul,
    I dunno. I fail to see what the obvious misrepresentation of this sheer evil has to do with “critical theory” (whatever that is). But Perry is right. Ebola is a tragedy. This is deliberate evil. I hope the Kenyans get more than a little medieval on their asses. Zed’s dead baby and all that. I think the issue here is this…

    A lot of people think a meaningful dialogue can exist with Islamists you know like when Maggie met Gorby. It can’t. Their strength is not a strength in and of itself. It is a relative strength. It is their absolute belief (though how many are coerced or just village idiots is a moot point though clearly some are true Justin Biebers) that in a sense gives us the banjax. It’s like Hamas and delightfully binary. So Israel ought to negotiate with Hamas? In an Ideal World(TM) like that depicted on copies of the Watchtower or whatever – fine but that is not the World we live in. There is no negotiation possible when Hamas requires the complete destruction of Israel and has re-iterated this consistently as an absolute. Bibi or any other Israeli PM can’t negotiate this because they have nothing to work on or from. This inflexibility is their strength only because many of the West don’t “get it”.

    I mean you could negotiate (admittedly) a token detente with the Sovs but with this lot they just want it all with no ifs or buts. Those well-meaning fools who propose a “two-state solution” don’t get it even when Hamas explicitly states this is their non-negotiable goal. This is their strength and our weakness. Specifically our weakness is we don’t fundamentally understand their absolutism and their inherent intractability.

    The average Gazan woman gives birth to 6+ kids. Jihadis, suicide bombers and the rest aren’t going out of fashion.

    Their rockets cost about $200 a throw. They ain’t going out of fashion either. What does a single shot of Iron Dome cost?

  • David

    Nick M is right. You cannot negotiate with Islamists. There is a time when the only solution is belt fed and 7.62mm in diameter and we have reached it. The head loppers are not interested in talking unless it furthers their cause.

  • The Other Rob:

    Depending upon the minutiae, you may be correct. But one can’t always rely upon legal minutiae. The question then becomes, is one willing to carry out such an act, given that it might be ruled to be murder.

    Is the Rule of Law in effect? Obviously in the Dar el Islam it isn’t.

  • Barry Sheridan

    Quite right Perry.

    I see the Archbishop of Canterbury is set to continue the turning of the other cheek philosophy. That just makes it easy for Islamic nut cases to go on killing, and go on killing they will. Negotiation is impossible with such people.

    Nick m, each Iron Dome missile cost about $40’000. Usually two are launched for every instance where the radars calculate the incoming missile will hit an urban target.

  • Leslie Bates has a point – it’s surely out of the jurisdiction of all but the Islamic courts, and as they’ll be the ones getting homicided it’s a moot point as to whether they rule it ‘murder’ or not.

  • the other rob

    Yes, it seems that I must concede the point. Leslie Bates is quite right.