Our hierarchy of interest

[stui magpie]

Interesting article in the Murdoch Press (OMG ) about the different reaction to the Paris attack than to Beirut a few days earlier.

http://www.news.com.au/national/criticism-of-worlds-focus-on-paris-after-terrorist-attack-at-the-expense-of-beirut/story-fncynjr2-1227610940061

I guess we're used to people doing this kind of stuff over there (beirut has had more bombs than a 1 direction album) so it just ain't news, whereas a terrorist attack in a Western city is.

[think positive]

Exactly what I said, David doesn't agree!

[David]

^ Yeah, but that's clearly not the only reason. I'm pretty sure Kiribati hasn't had too many terrorist attacks, but you can bet that an equivalent one over there wouldn't be front page news in Australia.

[think positive]

So what is the reason?

[stui magpie]

[think positive]

[David]

Get rid of the female genitalia and (perhaps) 'racist' and that's more or less correct, I'd say.

[stui magpie]

correct as in your opinion.

I'll stick with what I said before.

[ronrat]

Muslim attacks in Southern Thailand happen every other day and it doesn't get reported in Australia. A disgraced General was posted to Songhkla but resigned rather than put himself in harms way. Yet thousands of Aussies won't stop travelling to Phuket or Koh Samui. Australians want to travel to London. Paris, Rome New York. I can't say there are thousands of everyday people in Australia wanting to visit Bangladesh or Lebanon. Hell the Rohingas in Burma don't want to go "back" to Bangladesh despite sharing cultural and religious beliefs.

And Fox News is stirring the pot saying we they need to restore Guantanamo Bay to full strength.

Every irresponsible action has an equal irresponsible action.

[Mugwump]

There is another reason, of course, which is that the course of Western social policies tends to follow one another, and we have, across the West, allowed our politicians to compromise our societies - in so many ways - through large scale immigration of people from an Islamic background with radically different traditions and cultural assumptions, despite clear evidence that some meaningful proportion of them want to kill us, and a far, far greater proportion want to change our political system and alliances. Beirut has had its problem for centuries. We created - and we are still creating - ours today. That is one of the things that makes it so shocking, and makes Paris far more relevant to us than Beirut.

I should add that I do not deny your premise that people will always feel stronger empathy for those with whom they communicate most easily because they have the same terms of reference. The difference, perhaps, is that I think this is natural and inevitable, and denying that it should be so is a little like complaining about the sky being blue. I do not lack empathy for a Nigerian person abducted or killed by Boko Haram, and I would do anything reasonable to prevent it - but I find it nearly impossible to understand their experience as I can the experience of people who live in Paris.

In that regard, increasing the points of contact between our Islamic citizens and our non-Islamic citizens should certainly be a major goal of our present social policy.

[Tannin]

[HAL]

Which things in particular?

[think positive]

[HAL]

Which things in particular?

[stui magpie]

Yeah but the bombs were targeted. They didn't just nuke the whole area, they sent a message,

That would only be the obvious bit of what they've done, as much for PR as anything else, their real reaction will be less overt and public and more deadly.