Quote from canyonman00:
Let me see if I've got this straight. If a gang member kicks down your door, shoots the wife and kids, then burns the place down, it's ok because:
a) the african-american plight was caused by the abduction of our ancestors,
b) the poor educational system in our communities has not given us a fair chance,
c) we were forced to accept Christianity instead of our own mythical beliefs,
d) our belief that the police always are trying to terrorize and deprive us of our civil rights,
e) we are not compensated equitably in the workplace,
f) we lost all connections and rights to our homeland, and,
g) it's only fair because you deserve it and you know you do.
I think what the entire situation comes down to is "personally justifiable" action. Let's work on the premise that everyone does something for a reason. If I eat a candybar, I did it because I was hungry for something sweet. There is no moral grounds that would prevent me from acting out on my hunger -- I am hungry so I eat. Since most, if not all, people can sympathise with what it feels like to be hungry, we as humans all agree with each other that it is socially acceptable to eat something when we are hungry.
However, if someone does something else that we cannot relate to, we will probably view it outside of our own logic base and assume their actions to either be strange or immoral.
If a guy were to go out to a farm and get caught having sex with a cow, my very first reaction is to think, "Would I want to have sex with a cow? Do other people have sex with cows? If other people are having sex with cows, why am I not having sex with cows?" This is exactly how social norms are created. We observe an action, question the action and compare it to our own life experiences. Over time, our observations and "reactions" to those observations keep us in "check" with mainstream society.
Again, the guy who has sex with a cow would have that act labeled as strange, but is it immoral? Well, since we can't ask the cow and since the cow may have not wanted to consent to sex, it could be immoral but than again it may not be.
We really take for granted this constant "sub-consious" self-check system that we have in place. If we walked into a bathroom and saw someone pissing in the sink instead of a urinal, that person is performing a "strange act" compared to our own life experiences.
Now, what happens if, through two societies, it becomes perfectly acceptable to do one thing in one society and totally unacceptable to do that same thing in the other society? One will look at the other as having a "strange" custom -- perhaps even immoral.
I'm sure many conservative Jews and Muslims cringe when they observe the diets of other non-orthodox people. Through a strong fundamentalist structure, these views become polarized. It is no longer a subconscious system of passively observing events and than adapting one's own behavior to conform to society, but rather a proactive subconscious need to project one's ideals upon another society.
The pilots who crashed our own planes (and I am speaking as an American) into the two towers are heroes. That's right, I said they are heroes -- but I should qualify that statement -- they are heroes to a different group of people other than Americans. In our eyes, they are terrorists, cowards, villains, immoral, strange and every other word that we can use to condemn them.
The problem becomes whether we, as a nation, are condemning that specific action or over-generalizing our anger and projecting it upon an entire society or religion (muslims). Unfortunately this rift begins with the extreme radicals and builds up to the less extreme radicals and continues moving upwards until two entire societies are polarized against each other. It becomes a purely "us against them" mentality on both sides.
Sadly, the big picture is often missed and we only observe what we do and conclude that what is happening is the complete and total picture. Perhaps the man is having sex with a cow because some deranged lunatic held a gun up to his wife's head and said, "go screw a cow or the lady dies." Perhaps someone is pissing in the sink because they are at one of the many overcrowded football stadiums and everyone present has concluded that pissing in the sink is acceptable due to the nature of the situation.
That's just exactly what we need to do -- we need to stop and say, "Hey, just what really is taking place here?"
If you look at society, you see how people become cells to a much larger social body. Every cell in our own body is alive, but we don't really consider each cell to be necessary for our survival -- however all cells, taken as a whole, are necessary for our survival.
So I believe that the "terrorists" that crashed our planes were actually absorbed into a larger body that polarized their views. It is almost like they stopped to become individuals and took on components of a larger system. I don't think any of the people who took part in that operation knew any of the people they killed on 9/11 -- it wasn't personal against them -- but in their eyes, we are merely cells that belong to a body that they cannot stand -- and we must address these issues as well.
