Laughing at Saddam by Hero

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Laughing at Saddam

POSTED BY: HERO
UPDATED: Saturday, July 22, 2023 14:04
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 6100
PAGE 4 of 4

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Ants get to do what's hard-wired into them by evolution and their genetics. They don't change, aside from gradual evolution, and don't form committees (which may or may not be a good thing). If you think human beings operate only on the same instinctual level as ants, we have a contridiction, because if we act only on instinct, you wouldn't be thinking about it.

It makes no odds. Human behaviour is the behaviour manifested by Humans, the same as Ant behaviour is the behaviour exhibited by Ants. You have to have a further criteria for definition, otherwise you can arbitrarily decide someone is or is not Human based only on a whim. This is dangerous because it has been done to disastrous effect in the past.

You look at a massacre and say "Humans didn't do that", maybe it was the body snatchers, or the British-Commie-Nazi-Jews eh Geezer. I look and say "What evil man does". Frankly your position of "it's okay to dehumanise someone if you don't agree with their actions" is pretty much the same position as Saddam.

Quote:
If we humans get to step outside our gradual advance by evolution alone by actively developing new technologies, from fire to computers, and new social structures, from tribes to nations, why can't we also develop a concept of what it is to be human?

We can, by watching Humans, not by arbitrarily deciding what is Human and casting aside 'anything' that doesn't measure up to our arbitrary standard model of 'Human' to make ourselves feel better. By denying that Humans can do evil we open the door for Humans to do more evil, not less.

You bring up the example of religion, which is interesting, because Catholic priests could never rape a child. So when it does happen it didn't, so it happens again.

Quote:
Isn't that what law and religion, in their best expressions, try to do?

No. No law (save maybe ones made by the Fascists of the first half of the twentieth century) nor religion in my memory has ever said that certain behaviours make some one 'not human'.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:51 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

One source of inspiration on this topic is Antigone, the third of the three Theban tragedies. Antigone’s brother, Polynices, fights against the city-state (polis) of Thebes and is slain. The new ruler of Thebes is Creon who decrees that since Polynices fought against the polis, he should not have the right to be buried, but instead should be thrown into the wilderness and consumed by wild animals. Antigone insists that, even though Polynices was wrong for fighting against the state he should not be disavowed the right of burial (a right granted by the state) because the gods are a higher power then the state. Antigone’s reasoning is Polynices should have bowed to the higher power of the state, but the state should bow to the higher power of the gods. And by gods, we must understand that, what Sophocles is speaking of is the “rights of the people” as the gods symbolize what is right and good or what is natural. Sophocles point is that it is morally wrong for the state not to respect certain fundamental rights even of those who are the states worst enemy, and the example of a fundamental right that Sophocles gives is the right for a person’s death to be respected by the state. Although Antigone is clearly biased, it is not for Polynices that his death should be respected, but rather for the state, because in order for the state to function properly it must respect the gods, (i.e. it must do what is right) in that it must maintain order, and that means respecting the rights of the people.

Creon refuses to believe in the gods’ supremacy over the state until it is too late. He imprisons Antigone for supporting Polynices right to be buried. Antigone kills herself in her cell. Creon’s son, Antigone’s fiancé, Himen in turn kills himself. Himen’s mother (Creon’s wife) kills herself, and Creon, who finally relinquishes his strict unforgiving submission to the power of the state over the gods and decides to burry Polynices, discovers that Antigone and his family have killed themselves. Stricken with grief, he is unable to detect the coup in which he looses control of Thebes and is taken away by the new rulers, presumably to be executed.

Conclusion, if you don’t respect Saddam’s death, then your whole family will kill themselves and you’ll be executed.

I jest. I jest.

But really, the story does at least suggest that these very ideas have been discussed for many thousands of years. The new Iraqi regime should respect the death of Hussein, even as it denounces his life, because the state must never appear happy or callous towards death, since to do so is a slippery slope that may lead to the loss of credibility by which the state functions. Now, clearly the new Iraqi government understands this and is using some pretty heavy language to condemn the amateurish behavior (and at least one arrest, that I know of).

How does this relate to sympathy for Saddam Hussein? Well, I'm not sure it really does. We are free to have whatever opinion we like on this, and all this crap about sympathy towards Saddam is just an anti-war metaphor, anyway. It’s a criticism of the US and the invasion of Iraq, not any kind of real sympathy for Saddam Hussein, which I’m sure doesn’t actually exist in any appreciable quantity on this board. While I find the whole mocking Saddam Hussein to be tasteless (and even dangerous in some forms), I’m not going to position my self on Hussein’s side or defend him. The Iraqi regime should, however, defend Hussein’s right to have his death respected by the state. He should be buried in accordance with his beliefs (within reason) and those who mocked him and created bootlegged footage at his execution should be punished, which I believe is precisely what is happening. The state should do this, because unlike an individual, it holds the power of life and death over its constituency and it should never been seen as abusing that power. The state should never allow itself to be seen as all powerful; it must bow to the “gods,” which in a way, is precisely what Hussein never did.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:10 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
That I think is the difference between sympathy and empathy. Sympathy says - I feel sorry for you. Empathy says - I feel with you. Sympathy is earned based on the characteristics of the recipient, empathy is given based on the characteristics of the empathizer.

Just Wiki'd both "Sympathy" and "Empathy", and...I don't want to go there.

Using "Empathy says - I feel with you" as a point we agree on, I still am not sure that, as I see it "empathy is given based on the characteristics of the empathizer". It seems to me it has to be a two way street. I can only "feel with" a person to the extent I understand how that person feels. Perhaps my understanding of tgat person is imperfect. Perhaps that person's actions are so egregious that, although I can "feel with" a suicide bomber on some level, I can't make even that connection with the person.

Or maybe "empathy is given based on the characteristics of the empathizer" means that some folks have the characteristic of giving empathy unconditionally, and some don't.

Want'a leave it here, agreeing to disagree, or press on?

Thanks for the last few posts. When we get away from the acrimony, I always have to work a few new philosophical muscles and refine my thinking. Even though my conclusions may not agree with your's I enjoy the excercise.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:14 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
It makes no odds. Human behaviour is the behaviour manifested by Humans, the same as Ant behaviour is the behaviour exhibited by Ants.

Go be an ant, then. I got what I came for and I'm out. Watch out for that aardvark!

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:04 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The state should do this, because unlike an individual, it holds the power of life and death over its constituency and it should never been seen as abusing that power. The state should never allow itself to be seen as all powerful; it must bow to the “gods,” which in a way, is precisely what Hussein never did.

Wow Finn.
That was better than your post about Crow.
Good on you mate (even if I disagree about the anti-war comment, at least in my case).

Autolycus Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:18 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Well, this is just a refinement of my thinking.

"I can only "feel with" a person to the extent I understand how that person feels."

Philosophically speaking, no one truly knows how another feels. So empathy involves some projection on the part of the empathizer. But to imagine someone dying and not feel it in your gut is, I think, the definition of a lack of empathy. (Or maybe it's a lack of imagination.)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:43 AM

CHRISISALL

Okay, I won't go into all manner of detail here, but more than a decade ago there was this abusive guy that I truly hated- not disliked- HATED. I could easily picture myself killing him for how he treated his son, a poor innocent in the picture.
One day he was on TV- he'd killed himself with a pet (venomous) rattlesnake in the middle of a snowstorm. As much as I hated him for his emotional torture of his son, I felt badly- a human being had not found a way to change, and ended himself in a tormented, lonely way.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:31 PM

FLETCH2

A complete lack of empathy is as good a definition of "evil" as you will find anywhere.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:07 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Go be an ant, then. I got what I came for and I'm out. Watch out for that aardvark!

It's sad that you talk about critical thinking skills and exhibit a complete lack of same when situation suits. It is best you bow out, all your continued posturing is doing is making you look, at best, rather silly.

Go be someone who dehumanisise as situation suits, you're in real good company...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:14 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Wow Finn.
That was better than your post about Crow.
Good on you mate (even if I disagree about the anti-war comment, at least in my case).

Autolycus Chrisisall

I feel compelled to unambiguously point out that I am in no way defending Saddam Hussein. As far as empathy is concerned, that’s just an impulsive response. We look at Hussein’s hanging and we cringe, because we think to ourselves, “wow that looks like it hurt.” I have no doubt that we all did that on some level, but empathy is not a good indicator. For instance, it probably didn’t hurt. From what I saw, it looked like the hanging was done correctly, which means that Hussein’s neck broke at the base of the skull and he died instantly. Similarly, mocking Saddam Hussein’s death, while tasteless, is not a good indictor of a lack empathy. Mocking the death of a kitten or an innocent person might be, but there are lots of good reasons to be happy that Saddam is dead that have absolutely nothing to do with a lack of empathy.

I think Geezer made a very good point earlier when he said that there are other people who are more worthy of our respect. I would go one further on that; I think we do Saddam Hussein too much respect by even mocking his death. Certainly there are other people more deserving of our time? So a couple of jeers, here and there...fine-I think we've said enough. Now I say we close the lid on his coffin and be done with him.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:26 AM

RIVERTHRACE

I'm just worried about the people who now view Saddam as a martyr. Not just the ones already agreed, but those who get "inspired".

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:08 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Now I say we close the lid on his coffin and be done with him.

Agreed.

Atypically verbose Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:12 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I would go one further on that; I think we do Saddam Hussein too much respect by even mocking his death. Certainly there are other people more deserving of our time? So a couple of jeers, here and there...fine-I think we've said enough. Now I say we close the lid on his coffin and be done with him.

Good point. Mocking off, forgetting on.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:24 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"We look at Hussein’s hanging and we cringe." Yes, that's what I'm talking about. It doesn't mean we respect him, just that we recognize common human-ness.

As to death by hanging - or any other avenue - I have never seen a painless or stress-free death. They all happen in the midst of fear and struggle.

The story of Hussein's hanging will unfold over time. In the US it's already been overtaken by 'the Donald' v Rosie. But in Iraq I think it was a signal to Sunnis. That if they fight they had better fight to the death b/c they will be dead men (and women) at the start. If I had to predict I expect it to make a few Sunnis back down but to radicalize even more.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, July 22, 2023 2:04 PM

JAYNEZTOWN

Saddam got the Last Laugh, the Country is Fucked, the Koranimals took over

and its another you broke it you bought it...What does the USA get, more jihadi islamic imbeciles

Protesters try to storm Baghdad's Green Zone

https://apnews.com/article/iraq-denmark-sweden-quran-burning-08c2c2b8e
9ce61963a3d04b08c6f016d

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE