5 ms·
Giving in to terrorism does not end terrorism, it only ends the violent expression of it. If you do this, you end up living in fear (i.e. terror) that if you d
by foobarbazqux 13y ago
Giving in to terrorism does not end terrorism, it only ends the violent expression of it. If you do this, you end up living in fear (i.e. terror) that if you do not continue to do what the terrorists want, there will be more violence.
Anyone who cooperates with an abusive power does so because they have been sufficiently terrorized by that power and they don't want to risk further abuse. That kind of cooperation is not a good outcome; it's only the acceptance of coercion, because the alternative is worse.
- mikeash 13y agoSo, let's deliberately choose the worse outcome because... nope, I don't get it.
- foobarbazqux 13y agoThat's not my point. My point is that the lesser of two evils is still evil. If I rob you at gunpoint and you give me your wallet and I spare your life, it's still a bad outcome, it just isn't as bad as it could be.
- mikeash 13y agoWhy is that an interesting point? There isn't necessarily a non-evil way to proceed, just worse and less-worse ways. I never said this was all roses and wine.
- foobarbazqux 13y ago> I just said that it's a good outcome. Which it is. I was only arguing with this. > There isn't necessarily a non-evil way to proceed, just worse and less-worse ways. I never said this was all roses and wine. This is all I mean by bad means, bad ends. This mindset opens up the discussion to debating the pros and cons of different approaches. Anyway, take care.
- voodoo123 13y agoClearly you don't. Giving in to the demands of whoever bombs you is not the lesser of two evils.