This is a marvellous program about how taking either side in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is dangerous.
It is also a marvellous story of personal tragedies turned toward good.
Dec 15, 2006
Dec 14, 2006
Left Behind Video Game
Thanks to Matt for sending me this article.
It describes how a new video game, based on the Left Behind series, is considered family friendly by its creators. Yet to win the game, players must either convert people to Christianity or gun them down. Every person encountered has a life story, and many of the unconverted have Muslim-sounding names. This is, of course, a very logical outcome of the worldview presented in the Left Behind books.
What I find amazing is that the poeple who are promoting and buying this video game are the same people that would argue (I think rightly) that violent video games affect our view of the world and lead to violent actions. It's ok, though I suppose, as long as that killing fits into their worldview of who should be killed.
Thanks to Matt for sending me this article.
It describes how a new video game, based on the Left Behind series, is considered family friendly by its creators. Yet to win the game, players must either convert people to Christianity or gun them down. Every person encountered has a life story, and many of the unconverted have Muslim-sounding names. This is, of course, a very logical outcome of the worldview presented in the Left Behind books.
What I find amazing is that the poeple who are promoting and buying this video game are the same people that would argue (I think rightly) that violent video games affect our view of the world and lead to violent actions. It's ok, though I suppose, as long as that killing fits into their worldview of who should be killed.
Dec 12, 2006
There's a dead horse in this blog room, and I've been trying to beat it and kick it out of the room. But the horse is heavy and doesn't move much when I kick. It certainly does not scoot across the floor and out the door as is my intention when I kick. But what else is there to do? I'll just keep beating it.
My friend Jason, who I was happy to see post, commented on my last blog very intelligently (which you can see in the comments area). I finally got around to responding to him today, and I liked my response, so this being my blog and all - I decided to post my response here.
Enjoy!
(or rail!!)
Jason - Thanks for the input. Nice to see you around. Sorry for the lack of response or posting the last couple weeks. I'm teaching, and it's the end of the semester, and . . . It's a difficult time. But I'm over the major humps now, and things are getting better.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. There is a sense in which how we got into the war does not matter right now. What is most urgent is how we are going to proceed from this moment forward. However, I don't think that is fully the case. There is another sense in which if we don't analyze how/why we got into the war, and how/why it was done wrongly, we are not going to be able to move forward with any helpful plan.
The position that I have argued is that the way to deal with terrorism is not to automatically flex our muscles and put the fear of God into them. Terrorism is grassroots, and the only way to fight it is through grassroots. When we make people's living conditions better, they are less likely to listen to the rhetoric of the terrorists. However, if we make living conditions worse, they are more likely to seek out the rhetoric of the terrorists.
We got into this war because we had a singularly focused approach to dealing with terrorism, and that approach (in my opinion) has greatly fueled the flames of extremist Islamic terrorism around the world. If we continue with a singularly focused approach - we will continue to do the same (such as adding more troops as you suggest). However, the civil war that is now Iraq will not be overcome by our adding more troops and killing more people. I do not believe that is a "reasonable" approach. It hasn't worked thus far, and there is no evidence that it would work if we stepped up our efforts. I honestly don't see how you find it "rational" to "get behind WHATEVER is deemed necessary." To simply get behind WHATEVER is following blindly. It is NOT being rational.
Along the lines of rationality (sorry I'm harping on this, but your tone came across as a bit condescending when you said you were going to "recap Iraq, rationally" - seemingly in opposition to our irrational statements). Your "rational" recap included the statement, "The UN's recommendation was ultimately to let the UN handle it." Your response was simply, "Ummm...right-o." I didn't find that a rationally convincing argument against the UN.
I'm not sure why you put "kind war" in quotes. This is not a phrase I've heard anyone use or argue for. Who thinks a "kind war" is possible? You seem to be arguing against someone that's not there in that paragraph, but maybe I just don't know who you are referencing.
You also state, "But all the dissention and criticism at home isn't helping. It is making things worse." I'm sorry you feel this way, because dissention and criticism is what makes democracy - and if you're interested in quieting those voices, then what exactly are we fighting for?
I am not, however, arguing that we don't need more troops there for a time. I think that is a legitimate possibility that needs to be explored, and I think it may well be an answer. What I am arguing, however, is against the kind of blindly singular focus that you portray in your position. That singular focus declared victory (a now preposterous declaration) nearly 3 years ago. That singular focus did not stop and think that our actions in Iraq might lead to a civil war. That singular focus did not consider the ways in which it is impossible to force democracy on people that don't want it, or the possibility that once "empowered" by democracy, the people might vote in ways that were against our best interest. That singular focus did not consider that killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis might fuel greater terrorism.
Jesus commanded us not to get caught up in these cycles of violence but gave us instead a different way to approach these things. I believe that Jesus' teaching is not simply pie-in-the-sky for the sweet-by-and-by. Loving one's enemy doesn't just get you a crown in glory. In fact, Jesus was unconcerned with anyone's crown in glory when he instructed us to love our enemies. What he was concerned with was that we could live together, that we could show forth his light and love. Though it is not "rational," embracing one's enemy is the only possible way toward true peace. Attempts can be made to argue this rationally, but its rationality will never look as good as the rationality of smart bombs. It is only through faith in Jesus' command that we can stand strongly and denounce the false powers of this world that make quite convincing arguments that "might makes right."
To get a sense of what I think should be included in our view of what we should have done and how that might help us in moving forward in this war, take a look at what I wrote here:http://slowdownholdstill.blogspot.com/2006/09/war-in-Iraq-creates-more-terrorists.html
My friend Jason, who I was happy to see post, commented on my last blog very intelligently (which you can see in the comments area). I finally got around to responding to him today, and I liked my response, so this being my blog and all - I decided to post my response here.
Enjoy!
(or rail!!)
Jason - Thanks for the input. Nice to see you around. Sorry for the lack of response or posting the last couple weeks. I'm teaching, and it's the end of the semester, and . . . It's a difficult time. But I'm over the major humps now, and things are getting better.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. There is a sense in which how we got into the war does not matter right now. What is most urgent is how we are going to proceed from this moment forward. However, I don't think that is fully the case. There is another sense in which if we don't analyze how/why we got into the war, and how/why it was done wrongly, we are not going to be able to move forward with any helpful plan.
The position that I have argued is that the way to deal with terrorism is not to automatically flex our muscles and put the fear of God into them. Terrorism is grassroots, and the only way to fight it is through grassroots. When we make people's living conditions better, they are less likely to listen to the rhetoric of the terrorists. However, if we make living conditions worse, they are more likely to seek out the rhetoric of the terrorists.
We got into this war because we had a singularly focused approach to dealing with terrorism, and that approach (in my opinion) has greatly fueled the flames of extremist Islamic terrorism around the world. If we continue with a singularly focused approach - we will continue to do the same (such as adding more troops as you suggest). However, the civil war that is now Iraq will not be overcome by our adding more troops and killing more people. I do not believe that is a "reasonable" approach. It hasn't worked thus far, and there is no evidence that it would work if we stepped up our efforts. I honestly don't see how you find it "rational" to "get behind WHATEVER is deemed necessary." To simply get behind WHATEVER is following blindly. It is NOT being rational.
Along the lines of rationality (sorry I'm harping on this, but your tone came across as a bit condescending when you said you were going to "recap Iraq, rationally" - seemingly in opposition to our irrational statements). Your "rational" recap included the statement, "The UN's recommendation was ultimately to let the UN handle it." Your response was simply, "Ummm...right-o." I didn't find that a rationally convincing argument against the UN.
I'm not sure why you put "kind war" in quotes. This is not a phrase I've heard anyone use or argue for. Who thinks a "kind war" is possible? You seem to be arguing against someone that's not there in that paragraph, but maybe I just don't know who you are referencing.
You also state, "But all the dissention and criticism at home isn't helping. It is making things worse." I'm sorry you feel this way, because dissention and criticism is what makes democracy - and if you're interested in quieting those voices, then what exactly are we fighting for?
I am not, however, arguing that we don't need more troops there for a time. I think that is a legitimate possibility that needs to be explored, and I think it may well be an answer. What I am arguing, however, is against the kind of blindly singular focus that you portray in your position. That singular focus declared victory (a now preposterous declaration) nearly 3 years ago. That singular focus did not stop and think that our actions in Iraq might lead to a civil war. That singular focus did not consider the ways in which it is impossible to force democracy on people that don't want it, or the possibility that once "empowered" by democracy, the people might vote in ways that were against our best interest. That singular focus did not consider that killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis might fuel greater terrorism.
Jesus commanded us not to get caught up in these cycles of violence but gave us instead a different way to approach these things. I believe that Jesus' teaching is not simply pie-in-the-sky for the sweet-by-and-by. Loving one's enemy doesn't just get you a crown in glory. In fact, Jesus was unconcerned with anyone's crown in glory when he instructed us to love our enemies. What he was concerned with was that we could live together, that we could show forth his light and love. Though it is not "rational," embracing one's enemy is the only possible way toward true peace. Attempts can be made to argue this rationally, but its rationality will never look as good as the rationality of smart bombs. It is only through faith in Jesus' command that we can stand strongly and denounce the false powers of this world that make quite convincing arguments that "might makes right."
To get a sense of what I think should be included in our view of what we should have done and how that might help us in moving forward in this war, take a look at what I wrote here:http://slowdownholdstill.blogspot.com/2006/09/war-in-Iraq-creates-more-terrorists.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)