Responding to violence with compassion

A very good comment at The Standard on their Nice attack thread in response to this from Psycho Milt:

Compassion isn’t an appropriate feeling for someone who’d deliberately drive a truck into a crowd of random strangers.

McFlock:

Actually, it’s almost certainly a very appropriate response to someone who ends up in that mindspace.

Because the absence of compassion for those who inflict pain simply puts us into the same mindspace that they were in: anger focussed at people who we no longer fully regard as human.

It’s incredibly difficult to respond to violence with compassion, few of us can really do it, but it’s something to aspire to. The alternative is to just continue the cycle of violence and injustice.

 

Previous Post
Leave a comment

35 Comments

  1. Really? So tell me: do you feel any compassion for the driver?

    I don’t not the least.
    The barbaric inhumanity of what he has done is just mindboggling. He must have heard and felt each victim, each adult and every child, as he drove into or over them.

    I can feel compassion for the victims, the injured, the loved ones left behind.

    But not for the driver, nor do I want to feel compassion. More anger, disgust, disbelieve and yes, a fair bit of hatred too.

    No, the reaction by McFlock is just the standard, meaningless psycho-babble bullshitl, self-rightous, condescending and deluded.

    Compassion is not an appropriate response to violence.

    Reply
    • Having compassion doesn’t equate to having compassion for the driver, the killer. I have no compassion for him. It’s nonsense to suggest that I might.

      Do you feel any compassion for the many people being vilified by vague association with the killer? Or are you angry and disgusted at a billion people?

      Reply
      • Well then read McFLocks comment:

        Because the absence of compassion for those who inflict pain simply puts us into the same mindspace that they were in:

        What else does he argue for if not compassion for the killer

        Reply
        • Why don’t you go and ask him? I put his comment up here because I thought it was worthy of discussion. It’s fine if you want to express what you feel about it but I didn’t expect to be the target of your anger and to attacked for things I haven’t said.

          Reply
        • Gezza

           /  16th July 2016

          All I see here is honest opinion on the post topic.

          Reply
  2. Blazer

     /  16th July 2016

    wheres all the compassion for millions bombed in the middle east.

    Reply
  3. You put it up here because you thought it was a “very good comment”. You said so yourself. You implicitly endorsed that comment, especially in contrast to what Psycho Milt said.

    I have no reason to ask McFlock. I am asking you, why did you put it up on your blog and said it was a “very good comment”, especially in light of you saying that you, in fact, do not feel compassion for the driver.

    How can you say that when you actually disagree with the core message?

    Reply
    • I thought it was a very good comment for discussion. There’s a lot of things I post here that I either partially or wholly disagree with. I post things to encourage thought and discussion.

      And sometimes that means people target their anger and hatred at me. So be it.

      Reply
      • It’s not what you said, Pete.
        You said it was a very good comment in response to Psycho Milt’s post. That is an endorsement, no matter how you put it.

        You are just trying to weasel your way out now.

        Reply
        • So the most important thing about what happened in Nice is what you think I may have implied in a post?

          Whatever.

          Reply
        • Blazer

           /  16th July 2016

          I think its a very good comment,after all as I’m sure you know Christians are asked to ‘turn the other cheek’.

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  16th July 2016

            It didn’t work out too well for the Moriori. Nor for dealing with Hitler or for the likes of Stalin, Mao and Poll Pot. In those cases shoot first, be compassionate later.

            Reply
      • Gezza

         /  16th July 2016

        I see no anger and hatred in this comment. I see more honest expression, and a polite question.

        Reply
  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  16th July 2016

    The assumption there is a cycle of violence to continue or break is just false. Of course you can manufacture one if you are sufficiently determined and twisted but there is no such connection between this vile perpetrator and his victims and the bullet that finished him is the end of it.

    Reply
  5. Pete, a modest amount of intellectual honesty would be advisable.
    I never claimed anything like that.

    What we have been discussing here is your post here and your unwillingness to even admit that you may have made a mistake or not stated something clearly enough.

    You make a post clearly endorsing a comment and sentiment and then when I challenge you on it, you not only contradict yourself, but then go all prissy about it.

    And finally yes, the way we react to the incident is a very important part of it.

    The way McFlock reacts to it (and I say it again, what you endorsed in your post) is not only wrong, misguided at best and dangerously naive at worst.

    Reply
    • “Pete, a modest amount of intellectual honesty would be advisable.
      I never claimed anything like that.”

      Yet you’re busy claiming all sorts of things about me. I didn’t endorse everything McFlock wrote. If I did I’ve have said that.

      I’d have been happy to discuss what I may have agreed with and disagreed with but you were more intent on jumping in and attacking the messenger. You said you weren’t interested in discussing what McFlock wrote with McFlock. I was your target.

      I don’t know whether you were reacting on emotion or trying some point scoring, but whatever.

      Reply
    • Gezza

       /  16th July 2016

      Personally, I think this discussion unfortunately came off the rails at the point where PG said: “I didn’t expect to be the target of your anger”. I don’t see any anger in the comments made.

      Reply
  6. I find the position of McFlock to be unsupportable in its entirety. Mohamed and his ilk are simply unredemptive and evil. They are mass- murderers, they reach beyond the self-centred to a gross incapacity to exhibit humanity. The more we know about these psychopaths the better we will be able to nip their destructive forces in the bud, but what a pointless exercise it would be to have compassion for them.

    Reply
  7. J Bloggs

     /  16th July 2016

    I can feel compassion, and even sadness, for a rabid dog. This doesn’t stop me from putting a bullet into it.

    Reply
  8. PDB

     /  16th July 2016

    The problem here is that McFlock is trying to find human reasoning behind the actions of the driver when fanatics like the driver have none.

    You see this in someone like Jeremy Corbyn who thinks we should just go and have a friendly chat with ISIS and everything will be alright.

    Reply
  9. David

     /  16th July 2016

    Its clear how to break the cycle of violence;

    Charlie Hebdo publish cartoons of a certain historical person.
    Charlie Hebdo attacked 12 dead
    10 people killed in Niger, 9 churches burned following the post attack copy of Charlie Hebdo issued.
    Islamic Human Rights Commission award Charlie Hebdo their 2015 international ‘Islamophobe of the Year’. Seems bang on the money, if a dozen of your employees had been murdered by Islamists, you’d be right to be afraid of islamist wouldn’t you?

    They don’t want compassion, they want compliance.

    Reply
    • Brown

       /  16th July 2016

      Reforming Islam will be the beginning of the end of it so its not going to happen anytime soon. When people get their head around what Islam is and its desires this is so obvious that I despair that people still think its benign.

      Reply
  10. While these comments are engendered by the atrocity in Nice, it is only the latest – and the latest ‘fashion trend’ – in an exhaustive list of innumerable atrocities as old as civilisation or older … (although personally I believe it has a direct association with what we loosely call “civilisation”) …

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramoana_massacre

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Graham#The_day_of_the_rampage

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre

    Jesus, with his “do unto others” and “turn the other cheek” religious morality emerged from the clash and interaction of two of these civilisations, Roman polythesism and Jewish monotheism with their “wrathful” God and “eye for an eye” ethos. (Don’t talk to me about ‘utu’ being bad or primitive or savage!) [I stand to be corrected on Judaism, not being a religious academic]

    Many philosophers, notably Emmanuel Kant, have subsequently arrived at the same fundamental ethical position, a logical conclusion reached without resource to mysticism.

    Argue the right and wrong of it all you like, McFlock is ethically correct. We can never create peace by making or winning wars. We all know this and history also proves it over and over and over again ad infinitum …

    The only right involved is the ethical position of ‘self-defence’ and in the contemporary world even this has become compromised. The Islamic world can argue they are defending themselves; although personally I believe extremism and zealotism are really forms of individual psychosis. In Nice the danger to others required the aggressor to be killed ….

    Just some thoughts …

    Reply
    • “Jesus, with his “do unto others” and “turn the other cheek” religious morality…”

      Sorry, but turn the other check is a fabrication and is inconsistent with the Golden Rule. It goes beyond not resisting evil to inviting it.

      Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
      James 4:7

      McFlock is a humanist fuckwit.

      Reply
  11. corkey

     /  16th July 2016

    And while the West navel gazes and is waxing lyrical….. the barbarians amass. From outside the gates, and within. Its just a matter of time.

    Reply
    • Cicero’s designation of non-citizens as barbarians and subhuman was vain and hypocritical. This manufactured threat is expressed in recent times as Operation Gladio, which is characterised by attacking the innocent in order to transfer power to the state.

      French domestic intelligence (DGSI) chief Patrick Calvar warned on the 26th of June 2016 that an ‘Islamist’ attack on French children would be the trigger for a civil war. He said France was currently on the brink of that civil war. Calvar also predicted that ISIS (Da’esh) would use trucks as weapons. It is not unusual in the never-ending war on terror to hear accurate predictions by intelligence officials before attacks, with the same officials seemingly powerless to prevent them.

      http://www.gearoidocolmain.org/en/nice-truck-attack-2016/

      Reply
      • patupaiarehe

         /  16th July 2016

        What I find really interesting UT, is that in spite of the ever widening net of government surveillance of everyone, the security agencies never seem to see this sort of thing coming. Read as much between the lines of my comment as you like…..

        Reply
      • Gezza

         /  16th July 2016

        I read the article Uggers. You & pp might see this dreadful event being carried out as part of a Zionist conspiracy, but I don’t,

        Reply
        • patupaiarehe

           /  16th July 2016

          Hardly G, I see it as the actions of one individual, suffering from severe mental illness. And I am quite certain that he will never do it again.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  16th July 2016

            Sorry pp. Your comment was ambiguous. Thought you were agreeing with Uggers who’s made it clear countless times that the fact that someone warned at some point that something like this might happen somewhere sometime, is evidence that key important people in the government & Security Agencies are in on it, and / or have actually orchestrated it, using dupes or drugged up stooges or whatever. Apologies.

            Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s