I tend not to get into politics too much; I believe politics and religion (and to a certain extent sport) yield fruitless discussions. People do not have absolute knowledge on these subjects, and when some form of knowledge isn’t a requirement for the discussion to progress, then all that’s left is abrasive opinions to rub at my poor brain.
Just lately, I’ve been sodomising my brain cells somewhat by reading twitter posts. Quite often when something tragic happens, there’ll be a notable news journalist or celebrity quote something out of context (especially if it’s something Trump has said; I’m not claiming to be a Trump fan) and throw it at the crowd for them to swear at. It’ll follow with a discussion about how terrible a word or phrase is from a denotative or connotative and quote mined perspective, and a good time will be had by all. Twitter’s great because it doesn’t allow the news journalist or celebrity enough characters to quote the entire sentence even if they wanted to–this is a huge help to those in favour of contextomy.
Yesterday’s buzzword was “miracle” but today’s buzzword was slightly different to usual.
The buzzword today is terrorism
When a word like terrorism is brought up, there’s always going to be plenty of discussion about the English language.
One argument is that the latest shooting in
Lost Wages Las Vegas is terrorism and should be treated the same as all the attacks by ISIS. I think in some twisted form or other, the people pushing this form of argument generally want you to believe all nasty attacks are the same and we should treat these people the same way as we treat ISIS.
The response to the aforementioned argument follows shortly with a stickler in the mud; this person will quote one definition of the word “terrorism” (or whatever the buzzword is for the latest tragedy) and state that because there’s no political agenda, it cannot be terrorism. At this point I feel the bigger issue–someone sitting in a room shooting at many people–has been lost.
- Terrorism is the use of violence, especially murder and bombing, in order to achieve political aims or to force a government to do something.
- Systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal.
- The act of terrorising.
To save you the hassle of extensive Google searching, I’ve pasted a few definitions above. As you can see, not all definitions mention a political aspect to the word, and I don’t think it will matter how many times the people at Oxford Dictionaries tweet “Our dictionaries are descriptive rather than prescriptive“, people will still argue about specific words. If you forget specific definitions of words and you consider the general point here, is the attack by one man comparable to a terrorist group? Then I think it’s a really hard question to answer.
On one hand, you can say that this attack was completely pointless and that he hasn’t gathered hundreds/thousands of people to fight with him. And on the other, you can also argue strapping Jingle Bombs to your crotch in hopes to have a Merry Christmas and be sent towards 72 virgins, is also equally as pointless. Personally I think they’re the same in that they’re pointless attacks but the mindsets are probably severely different.
For me, it doesn’t really matter what words are used and it doesn’t even matter if the types of brains that do this are similar. It’s stupid and cruel behaviour that never achieves anything. Occasionally something will happen as a byproduct e.g. greater plane security, but this usually has a negative impact on the masses who behave themselves (if everyone behaved, my US Visa would probably have been accepted for example), but there’s no direct action that’s taken to please everyone involved.
Gun control might help, but wanting to take an American’s expensive gun away after they’ve legally spent hundreds/thousands on said gun, without reimbursement, is comparable to wanting to take away my haribos/chocolate.
A part of me wonders if being slightly fake is the problem. Large companies that deal with the public e.g. food stores, will tell their staff to smile at their customers (regardless of if they feel like shit) to help sales. Politicians are forced into giving insincere apologies and then criticised when they’re shown to be dishonest.
We are pretty much surrounded by fake behaviour that’s forced upon us, and maybe some of these crazies don’t feel they can express their opinions until they’re about to blow up. I don’t really know.
Lastly. I offered to give blood. I don’t see why the fuck I should donate money if the US won’t even have me in the country, so if they want something from me, they’ll have to allow me in the country. It seems like a fair deal.