4 ms·

This article, though, is documenting the manner in which these tribal groups would, rather than merely condone, but instead actively participate communally in t

This article, though, is documenting the manner in which these tribal groups would, rather than merely condone, but instead actively participate communally in the torture and murder of insiders, their own kinfolk. As a thought experiment, what does one do, when entering a room only to discover an entire family, all members old enough to know better, is engaged in depraved incestuous rituals? Moral relativism is always a painful psychological quagmire.

ivoryst 11y ago
Sorry, but what exactly is your point (in plain english)? And I used the term "outsider" to refer to any perceived differences, whether its race, gender, religion, beliefs etc. And yes, some people condone; while others actively participate. I'll repeat, as you seem to have missed mine: every culture, modern or historic, has its fair mix nobles and savages. Tagging a whole group of people as savages is just good old fashioned racism.
- whyIndeed 11y ago
  My point is that it's difficult to separate the horrible, malevolent, criminal aggressors from the benign spectators or unwilling particpants, when witnessing barbaric events of human cruelty.
  - ivoryst 11y ago
    Its easy to be a keyboard warrior, and judge others from the safety of your home. Maybe one day you'll be given an opportunity to prove to the world just how brave and courageous you are facing up to "horrible, manovelent criminals" in defense of the helpless. Most of those so called "benign spectators" caught up in such situations are women, children and powerless men trying to stay alive (by not standing up to the savages among them ).
    - whyIndeed 11y ago
      Really. Quite combative. Drawing conclusions for whichever labels I present, when I did not specify how I might choose to apply the labels. Do you see where you're jumping to conclusions about my disposition yet? My last words to you are this: A burning death after mutilation is cruelty. The aggressors are torturing and burning the victims. The murdered suffering before the mob are victims. Everyone else witnessing the events is a spectator, although some of the spectators may be accomplices to the aggressors. Evidence for many of these events will surely be incomplete, and likely skewed. Without evidence in any direction how would anyone know. But you, you're lashng out at people on the internet. At some point you marked me as an enemy. Maybe you'll realize you misread my remarks. Oh well, done with this conversation. I won't be replying to you again.
      - ivoryst 11y ago
        You obviously have a good grasp of vocabulary, but use it to obfuscate rather than communicate. You could of-course speak plainly about what you really mean, but that would unmask your true prejudices, wouldn't it? And yes, from the negro burnt to death in the american south; the salem witch-hunts of the early settlers and the same in PNG, it is all barbaric.

ivoryst 11y ago

Sorry, but what exactly is your point (in plain english)? And I used the term "outsider" to refer to any perceived differences, whether its race, gender, religion, beliefs etc. And yes, some people condone; while others actively participate. I'll repeat, as you seem to have missed mine: every culture, modern or historic, has its fair mix nobles and savages. Tagging a whole group of people as savages is just good old fashioned racism.

whyIndeed 11y ago
My point is that it's difficult to separate the horrible, malevolent, criminal aggressors from the benign spectators or unwilling particpants, when witnessing barbaric events of human cruelty.
- ivoryst 11y ago
  Its easy to be a keyboard warrior, and judge others from the safety of your home. Maybe one day you'll be given an opportunity to prove to the world just how brave and courageous you are facing up to "horrible, manovelent criminals" in defense of the helpless. Most of those so called "benign spectators" caught up in such situations are women, children and powerless men trying to stay alive (by not standing up to the savages among them ).
  - whyIndeed 11y ago
    Really. Quite combative. Drawing conclusions for whichever labels I present, when I did not specify how I might choose to apply the labels. Do you see where you're jumping to conclusions about my disposition yet? My last words to you are this: A burning death after mutilation is cruelty. The aggressors are torturing and burning the victims. The murdered suffering before the mob are victims. Everyone else witnessing the events is a spectator, although some of the spectators may be accomplices to the aggressors. Evidence for many of these events will surely be incomplete, and likely skewed. Without evidence in any direction how would anyone know. But you, you're lashng out at people on the internet. At some point you marked me as an enemy. Maybe you'll realize you misread my remarks. Oh well, done with this conversation. I won't be replying to you again.
    - ivoryst 11y ago
      You obviously have a good grasp of vocabulary, but use it to obfuscate rather than communicate. You could of-course speak plainly about what you really mean, but that would unmask your true prejudices, wouldn't it? And yes, from the negro burnt to death in the american south; the salem witch-hunts of the early settlers and the same in PNG, it is all barbaric.