Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
It's really not clear what you're saying here, and I hear a similar argument quite often. Basically, we need to avoid "confirming the narrative" of the extremists, because... I'm not sure. You say that we need to prevent the narrative from becoming "entrenched". What does this mean?
|
I think it's pretty clear what I'm saying, although it seems that yet again your legal training that emphasizes the nitpickery of specific words over the gestalt and context of sentences seems to have caused you difficulty.
The narrative that these terrorists want to create is Islam vs Everybody Else. When people start talking about the "Muslims" being the problem, oir "Islam" being the problem, they are helping the terrorists create that narrative. Once that interpretation of events becomes the norm, if you are of the Muslim faith, you will be forced to choose either the side of your brethren, or of those who want to deport/marginalize/kill you.
We already know what causes terrorism - alienated groups, humanity's love of violence, and the human failing of credulity. It's not Islam, it's not Machine-Gun Jesus, it's not militant tree-huggers, it's not even godless socialism in our precious bodily fluids. It's people letting their fear and anger drive them to simple solutions and finding someone to blame, and reducing discourse to the same level makes us no better.