Escape Artists
May 23, 2018, 01:47:01 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
  Print  
Author Topic: EP120: The Sundial Brigade  (Read 45324 times)
Pink Shift
Palmer
**
Posts: 35



« Reply #40 on: August 27, 2007, 08:06:56 PM »

what Mr. Tweedy said pretty much hit the spot. attacking innocents to effect change through fear is terrorism. to attack a strategic targets to remove a government is not.

While I generally agree with this, it is important to understand that these things aren't cut-and-dried.  While your description applies to WTC or the London subway or bus bombs in the West Bank, it could just as easily apply to Hiroshima or Nagasaki.  It's not just rogue independents who use terror and attacks against civilian populations as a tool of political action.

Most thing are not,
 "cut and dried"
It is
 a red flag
 when they are presented that way.
It would be difficult
 to apply what was said
 to Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
Japan and the USA
 were two governments
 of established countries.
In WWII and throughout
 most of history civilian cities
 were caught in the crossfire of war.
The method in Japan was
 drastically different
 and new to the human race.
Not all violence is equal
 nor is all violence wrong.
It is OK to defend yourself
 or another person
 from being harmed
 by another person.
It is OK for a nation
 to defend itself
 from attack.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2007, 08:09:27 PM by Pink Shift » Logged

Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question.

I imagine that yes is the only living thing.

e. e. cummings
swdragoon
Peltast
***
Posts: 82



WWW
« Reply #41 on: August 27, 2007, 09:45:04 PM »

heroshima and nagisaki wer chosen for thear miltary value not civil...
Logged

Improvise, Adapt ,Overcome.
Opabinia
Palmer
**
Posts: 35


« Reply #42 on: August 27, 2007, 10:47:11 PM »

So, how are people classifying the Nat Turner rebellion, then? Or the French resistance during WWII?

Terrorism is often the recourse of oppresed populations who don't have access to a sanctioned army.
Logged
swdragoon
Peltast
***
Posts: 82



WWW
« Reply #43 on: August 28, 2007, 01:52:42 AM »

in a word ineffective

the first is a mass murder (i would say justified)
the second was attacks on military and government targets from a gorilla uprising.
Logged

Improvise, Adapt ,Overcome.
wakela
Hipparch
******
Posts: 779



WWW
« Reply #44 on: August 28, 2007, 03:50:24 AM »

Loved the story.  This is I think what science fiction should be.  Though I can't argue with any of sirana's points.

I have to admit that the Think for Yourself song was stuck in my head for the rest of the day, but I found its message kind of condescening.  The singer is telling me that I need to be more skeptical of people telling me what to think...except him.  "Everyone who doesn't think like me is a conformist sheep!  You guys should all be thinking like me!"  Everyone is a conformist, we just conform to different things.

Was V for Vendetta shown in the UK?  Is it available now?  I liked the movie, but you could very easily make the case that it glorifies terrorism.  Before you give me all the reasons why it doesn't glorify terrorism, keep in mind that whether or not it actually does is irrelevant.  A UK censor only has to think it does.
Logged
tpi
Peltast
***
Posts: 92


« Reply #45 on: August 28, 2007, 08:06:32 AM »

As a whole, I liked the story. In the beginning had some trouble adjusting to the very low and deep voice of the reader, but after a while I got used to it.
There was one very small detail in the beginning of the story which bugged me a while.
The main protagonist goes to the butcher’s shop to buy ham and meat. He buy two kilos of ham which is quite a lot for two or three persons, especially for an apparent begger to buy. Especially when he bought (asked, borrowed, begged what ever) also kilogram of meat. I was waiting for a long time that there would be a feast or something which would explain the amount of the meat.  Smiley
Logged

Redds
Extern
*
Posts: 4


« Reply #46 on: August 28, 2007, 10:27:49 AM »

I kind of get the feeling that people are missing the point arguing about whether terrorists have to be majority or minority. Every right thinking person has to abhor violence yet what I think this story tried to outline was the path of an educated individual to committing an act of extreme undirected violence. I really disagree with Pink Shifts interpretation that this is a warning about Islamic extremism confining people in set roles, I couldn't see that anywhere.

I saw the sad fact that you can't force people to act "in period", i.e. adopt a set of values because that is what you decide for them, you can't protect free speech through blanket censorship and you can't create freedom by imprisoning people without trial. If I lived in fear of these conditions I think I would try something extreme.
Logged
Redds
Extern
*
Posts: 4


« Reply #47 on: August 28, 2007, 10:29:54 AM »

I live in the UK so I think I just broke the law.
Logged
Chodon
Lochage
*****
Posts: 519


Molon Labe


« Reply #48 on: August 28, 2007, 10:59:17 AM »

I live in the UK so I think I just broke the law.

Thought-criminal! Shocked
Logged

Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither.
Pink Shift
Palmer
**
Posts: 35



« Reply #49 on: August 28, 2007, 11:10:35 AM »

I really disagree with Pink Shifts interpretation that this is a warning about Islamic extremism confining people in set roles, I couldn't see that anywhere.

The Martians took
 people from a 24th century setting
 and put them into forced roles
 in a theme park set 300 years in the past.
The mother had a technical position
 and son had an had advanced education in the 24th century
 but were forced
 to play the roles
 they were given in the 21st century theme park.

The Islamic extremist in Afghanistan dictated
 the behaviors of men and women;
 boys and girls.
They took a society
 from the 20th century
 to centuries earlier.
Women could not work outside the home
 and girls could not go to school.
Women had to wear
 certain clothes outside the home.
Men had to have beards of a certain length.
There were
 many other rules.
Imams roamed the street to
 enforce the laws.

The parallels are very strong.
Logged

Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question.

I imagine that yes is the only living thing.

e. e. cummings
Mr. Tweedy
Lochage
*****
Posts: 497


I am a sloth.


WWW
« Reply #50 on: August 28, 2007, 11:17:47 AM »

The parallels are very strong.

I Agree.

These parallels are present with any group that uses terror: The terrorist is always trying to impose a lifestyle that the population has no interest in living.  The "Islamofascists" of the present want to force all people to live according to their religious laws, regardless of how the people in question would choose to live or what they believe.  This is very similar to the Martians in the story, who use fear to keep the people of Earth living according to arbitrary rules, instead of living the lives they would choose for themselves.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2007, 11:27:52 AM by Mr. Tweedy » Logged

Hear my very very short story on The Drabblecast!
DKT
Friendly Neighborhood
Hipparch
******
Posts: 4980


PodCastle is my Co-Pilot


WWW
« Reply #51 on: August 28, 2007, 11:29:53 AM »

in a word ineffective

the first is a mass murder (i would say justified)
the second was attacks on military and government targets from a gorilla uprising.

The first, being the Nat Turner rebellion?  You mean mass murder, including the murder of women and children, is justified?  How, exactly?  

I think I'm more inclined to agree that there's a great blurring of the lines between freedom fighters and terrorists, especially in today's technological world where cities are bombed because they contain a military target but civilian casualties are high.  I think part of the problem is that in today's climate, the term terrorist is bandied about too easily.  

And I completely agree that often whether or not a person/group are considered terrorist is connected to whether or not they were successful.  Michael Collins (of Ireland) is now considered a hero.  Had he not been successful, I would not at all be surprised if he was dubbed a terrorist.  He may have actually been labeled a terrorist by the British at the time, I'm not sure how common the word was back then.

Terrorists do what they do because they feel they are oppressed and that they lack a comparable military to their oppressors, and so they look to alternative means of fighting.  This could be suicide bombs, guerrilla warfare, and assassinations.

In the story, Antonio certainly believes what he's doing is right, and regardless of how we define terrorism, I think we can all agree that we sympathize with why he did what he did, however misguided his actions ended up becoming.  I think what this story does best is help us try to understand why a person would do something like this and put a human face on the issue.  And that's certainly one reason why I love SF/F.
Logged

Redds
Extern
*
Posts: 4


« Reply #52 on: August 28, 2007, 11:31:44 AM »


(Pink Shift)The parallels are very strong.(Newbie can't quote)


Ok so what you are saying is that because the Martians were forcing people to act out a life style which came from a previous era they were in some way similar to the Taliban. Everything that the Martians were forcing the Earth people to do was out of a pure consumerist drive, they were expecting the Earth people to conform to their expectations in order to provide the Martians with an experience. The Martians expected the Earth people to be grateful for the intervention in their lives after being absent for hundreds of years and used advanced technology to crush any opposition.

I do not support the Taliban or even condone their views especially about women but I did feel the Martians were closer to the Western interventionist agenda than any Islamic extremist. I think the story shows what happens if you try to subjugate a peoples way of life in order to feed another classes consumerist desires and in doing so only treat them as interchangeable pawns rather than individuals.
Logged
Pink Shift
Palmer
**
Posts: 35



« Reply #53 on: August 28, 2007, 11:45:51 AM »


(Pink Shift)The parallels are very strong.(Newbie can't quote)

Ok so what you are saying is that because the Martians were forcing people to act out a life style which came from a previous era they were in some way similar to the Taliban. Everything that the Martians were forcing the Earth people to do was out of a pure consumerist drive, they were expecting the Earth people to conform to their expectations in order to provide the Martians with an experience. The Martians expected the Earth people to be grateful for the intervention in their lives after being absent for hundreds of years and used advanced technology to crush any opposition.

Change consumerism to (Islamic extremist) religion


I do not support the Taliban or even condone their views especially about women but I did feel the Martians were closer to the Western interventionist agenda than any Islamic extremist. I think the story shows what happens if you try to subjugate a peoples way of life in order to feed another classes consumerist desires and in doing so only treat them as interchangeable pawns rather than individuals.

Change consumerism to (Islamic extremist) religion

Where
in the story
 do you find
 a focus on the economics?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2007, 11:54:54 AM by Pink Shift » Logged

Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question.

I imagine that yes is the only living thing.

e. e. cummings
Mr. Tweedy
Lochage
*****
Posts: 497


I am a sloth.


WWW
« Reply #54 on: August 28, 2007, 12:02:13 PM »

And I completely agree that often whether or not a person/group are considered terrorist is connected to whether or not they were successful.

The winners always try to vilify the losers.  I don't think we should worry about who is or is not called a terrorist in retrospect.  We should worry about what people actually do, not about how politicians spin it after the fact.

Terrorists do what they do because they feel they are oppressed and that they lack a comparable military to their oppressors, and so they look to alternative means of fighting.  This could be suicide bombs, guerrilla warfare, and assassinations.

Not necessarily.  In the present, the terrorists are almost universally the ones doing the oppressing.  The Muslim terrorists of today are trying, literally, to conquer the world.  Example: Many of the "Iraqi insurgents" are not Iraqis at all.  They are foreigners intent on conquering the Iraqi democracy and setting up a theocratic dictatorship.  Similarly, the 9/11 attackers were not trying to defend a homeland from American aggression; they were trying to conquer us and make us bow to their ideology.

I don't know about historically, but in the 21st century terrorist are not trying to free oppressed people.  They are trying to oppress free people.
Logged

Hear my very very short story on The Drabblecast!
DKT
Friendly Neighborhood
Hipparch
******
Posts: 4980


PodCastle is my Co-Pilot


WWW
« Reply #55 on: August 28, 2007, 12:14:18 PM »

The winners always try to vilify the losers.  I don't think we should worry about who is or is not called a terrorist in retrospect.  We should worry about what people actually do, not about how politicians spin it after the fact.

I agree it's important to worry about people do, but I also think it's important to study history so we have a better understanding.  This should help us deal with contemporary problems, since the reasons of terrorism is often rooted in the past.

Terrorists do what they do because they feel they are oppressed and that they lack a comparable military to their oppressors, and so they look to alternative means of fighting.  This could be suicide bombs, guerrilla warfare, and assassinations.

Not necessarily.  In the present, the terrorists are almost universally the ones doing the oppressing.  The Muslim terrorists of today are trying, literally, to conquer the world.  Example: Many of the "Iraqi insurgents" are not Iraqis at all.  They are foreigners intent on conquering the Iraqi democracy and setting up a theocratic dictatorship.  Similarly, the 9/11 attackers were not trying to defend a homeland from American aggression; they were trying to conquer us and make us bow to their ideology.

I don't know about historically, but in the 21st century terrorist are not trying to free oppressed people.  They are trying to oppress free people.

I don't agree in general.  Palestinian terrorists are not oppressing Jews in Israel.  They feel like they have been oppressed and kicked out of their homeland (we can go round and round debating whether or not that's the case, but I think we can agree that's what the Palestians believe). 
Logged

Redds
Extern
*
Posts: 4


« Reply #56 on: August 28, 2007, 12:46:22 PM »

As I understand it the Martians came back to earth and fixed the seas and the social disorder, they then basically took over and started to tell people how to live. In effect making them live in a way that they dictated but that was not based around any higher ideal merely one that provides the Martians with what they want to consume. In this case their desire is for the consumption of experiences, not even genuine but recreated from their own ideas of a past they had no part of. This is the consumerism I am talking about not economic but experiential, I don't think that matters though. The Earthlings are being forced to provide a service to the Martians which does not benefit them. They then wonder why the people are turning to "terrorism".
Logged
swdragoon
Peltast
***
Posts: 82



WWW
« Reply #57 on: August 28, 2007, 02:07:00 PM »

To start with if any murder is ever justified then the subjugation and ownership of ones person is the number one reason it would be.

And as much as it pains me to admit it Michale Collins was a terrorist. And defining the Irish as winners in this (ongoing conflict) is only wish full thinking.

And the Martians, to me seem to be a generalized picture of all con curing armies. Get out those history books again and look at the results of all occupied lands in all wars in world history. You will find many parallels.

In looking through my posts it may seem that i am defending the US but only be caws, i think of blurred vision. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets, but internment camps were terrorism. And there  are other examples that could be used.
Logged

Improvise, Adapt ,Overcome.
ajames
Lochage
*****
Posts: 358



« Reply #58 on: August 28, 2007, 03:23:12 PM »

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets, but internment camps were terrorism. And there  are other examples that could be used.

I see the internment of Japanese-American citizens as an overreaction to a perceived threat, and in this way similar to the law passed in Britian.  [Yes, the threat from Japan was certainly real enough, but the threat from Japanese-Americans was certainly perceived to be much, much more dangerous than it was.  And no, I am not trying to minimize the injustice of the action or the extreme hardships it caused.] 

So if the internment was an act of terrorism, is this law an act of terrorism?  I think no on both counts, but there is enough ambiguity on what terrorism is to allow reasonable people to say otherwise, too.

Anyone else wondering if the CIA [and who knows what other government agencies] is monitoring this discussion everytime someone sends a new post?
Logged
DKT
Friendly Neighborhood
Hipparch
******
Posts: 4980


PodCastle is my Co-Pilot


WWW
« Reply #59 on: August 28, 2007, 03:44:15 PM »

To start with if any murder is ever justified then the subjugation and ownership of ones person is the number one reason it would be.

To a very large degree, I can sympathize with Nat Turner.  However, I cannot sympathize with killing children for any reason.  Generally, I don't believe murder is justifiable.  I certainly don't believe murdering children is ever justifiable. 

And as much as it pains me to admit it Michale Collins was a terrorist. And defining the Irish as winners in this (ongoing conflict) is only wish full thinking.

Interesting.  I'm not sure I'd consider Collins a terrorist but I can easily understand why someone would, even if I don't agree.  However, your point about calling the Irish winners is well-taken.  They've certainly been dealt a pitiful hand. 

No argument at all (from me) about whether or not the Martians in the story were an occupying force in the story and the parallels that can be drawn historically (I'm not sure if that that comment was aimed for me, but I figured I'd add my opinion just to be safe). 
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!