Breivik's killing spree and ideological stuff
Not really a post, some thoughts. Beginning with saying that this was a gruesome mass murder and act of terrorism. I applaud the response of democracy from Norway. That said, this incident brings into stark relief some of the worst prejudices as the world and country.
- Many assumed that it was an Islamic attack.
- Few were interested in him not being Muslim
- People substituted details of incidents in their templates and returned to canned rhetoric, inlcuding drawing similarities with “Hindutva terror”
I think this kind of thinking is not useful to the world or any country in it. The danger with being slave to stereotypes is that we lose touch with the reality and our responses to situations are to our imagination, rather than what is actually happening.
Like I spoke in Intellectual deficit in Indian society, the dangers are that in being slave to decisions rather than data, we miss out on a lot of points where functional change can be introduced.
This kind of thinking is not only alienating, but rather deficient in logic. How does Hindutva terror fit in? If it does, is the same assumption applied to other entities and people mentioned similarly? Why is there such resistance in us to acknowledge acts of terror from non-Islamic religious orientations? How does this help?
I think it is high time people learned to see terrorism as a sum of actions rather than a singular melodramatic monolithic entity. Anyone can act. Stereotyping the actors blunts our ability to analyze and address incisively. I say, even if the terrorist was Muslim, it is important to see specifics rather than hooking to pet donkeys and flogging them along well worn and ineffective paths.
Definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. If our response to any happening anywhere in the world is through a narrow minded Indian version complete with pet accusations… doesn’t help.