Follow Sprog
excluded from the scope of this analysis of religious terrorist groups. It would be stupid to think about sectarianism as a form of action groups that are, by definition, sectarian, sectarian understanding within the meaning of dogmatic organization.
What I put under the microscope is the structure of reasoning who is still killing, although their goals can be achieved by nonviolent means, and also exclude pathological behaviors (or psychiatric) assumes that its neighbor to the killer who has no ideological motivation sadistic
So what are the reasons that push someone to kill for an ideal? Discarded clinical reasons, and also discarded cases in which dictatorships and invasions can cover foreign policy, we have no explanation for the ideological sense of caging, in the belief that otherwise can not achieve their political objectives. And what degree of fault is in this state which attacked and what degree is society? I think that what Meridian does not trust the terrorist is in the population for which it is said, as if it had the support (or a portion of which was sufficient quantitative significance in institutions), would no doubt raise the their aspirations in a nonviolent, democratic and thereby increase their expectations of success.
Because if he does claim is immediately assumed that their political objectives and not merely the right to propose them, it is obvious that the will of the citizenry. This is a fascist attitude (although the English fascists now use this expression, together with of Nazi qualify for us Democrats lost credibility. But I still believe if adjusted)
So what happens to the ideological moments before an assassin to kill? Believe that this murder does not denigrates their ideals? The enemy give up their armies the next day, all fearful? They say that killing people is coming to defend their strategic objectives? It's more like we believe that a flying saucer come to save ... an idea is absurd, contradictory, beyond the wisdom, vinculable undoubtedly when their targets (which he sees only achievable) about the methods and when al'encarnació of dogma as a single value, a sect of any kind. Nothing is more important than the homeland, the leader, that faith, that the revolution that God, who ... It is exactly the same irrational behavior.
terrorism and tries to murder? The only reasonable option can only be: understand the terror, not among the enemy, but among its own citizens, among which aims to fight. His domination through violence. Pushing through fear their unconditional commitment to the cause (and its methods, entrenched in the very definition of project), with a forceful ideological core completely dogmatic (any other way by the dogma, the act of faith by thinking about his fight). Why do not realize at the time that violence has supplanted the impeachment because he has necessarily perverted, emptying it of essential critical capacity that defines and justifies any action policy? Because you can not do it without having to consider the purpose of his life and his sacred mission on earth ...
And because, at this point of irrationality, what you need (avoiding reflection) is the visceral reaction that we have come to the state when feelings replace the political reasoning. Repression, ilegalitzacions, closure of newspapers, popular consultations anatemització, indiscriminate arrests. Cross demonstrate his power, but what is perceived is real fear.
More fuel for a fire which does atre feedback to mutual interests, and.
What I put under the microscope is the structure of reasoning who is still killing, although their goals can be achieved by nonviolent means, and also exclude pathological behaviors (or psychiatric) assumes that its neighbor to the killer who has no ideological motivation sadistic
So what are the reasons that push someone to kill for an ideal? Discarded clinical reasons, and also discarded cases in which dictatorships and invasions can cover foreign policy, we have no explanation for the ideological sense of caging, in the belief that otherwise can not achieve their political objectives. And what degree of fault is in this state which attacked and what degree is society? I think that what Meridian does not trust the terrorist is in the population for which it is said, as if it had the support (or a portion of which was sufficient quantitative significance in institutions), would no doubt raise the their aspirations in a nonviolent, democratic and thereby increase their expectations of success.
Because if he does claim is immediately assumed that their political objectives and not merely the right to propose them, it is obvious that the will of the citizenry. This is a fascist attitude (although the English fascists now use this expression, together with of Nazi qualify for us Democrats lost credibility. But I still believe if adjusted)
So what happens to the ideological moments before an assassin to kill? Believe that this murder does not denigrates their ideals? The enemy give up their armies the next day, all fearful? They say that killing people is coming to defend their strategic objectives? It's more like we believe that a flying saucer come to save ... an idea is absurd, contradictory, beyond the wisdom, vinculable undoubtedly when their targets (which he sees only achievable) about the methods and when al'encarnació of dogma as a single value, a sect of any kind. Nothing is more important than the homeland, the leader, that faith, that the revolution that God, who ... It is exactly the same irrational behavior.
terrorism and tries to murder? The only reasonable option can only be: understand the terror, not among the enemy, but among its own citizens, among which aims to fight. His domination through violence. Pushing through fear their unconditional commitment to the cause (and its methods, entrenched in the very definition of project), with a forceful ideological core completely dogmatic (any other way by the dogma, the act of faith by thinking about his fight). Why do not realize at the time that violence has supplanted the impeachment because he has necessarily perverted, emptying it of essential critical capacity that defines and justifies any action policy? Because you can not do it without having to consider the purpose of his life and his sacred mission on earth ...
And because, at this point of irrationality, what you need (avoiding reflection) is the visceral reaction that we have come to the state when feelings replace the political reasoning. Repression, ilegalitzacions, closure of newspapers, popular consultations anatemització, indiscriminate arrests. Cross demonstrate his power, but what is perceived is real fear.
More fuel for a fire which does atre feedback to mutual interests, and.
Let's excluded from the scope of this analysis to the nature of religious terrorist groups. It would be a estupidez reflect on the actions of sectarianism as a form of groups that already are, by definition, sectarios, entendido sectario senses in organizational dogmatic. Lo que quiero
placed under the microscope is the structure of reasoning of those who continue to kill, even if their goals can be achieved by nonviolent means. (And we also exclude pathological behaviors and that, although undoubtedly some are due to psychological factors (or psychiatric). I am assuming that anyone who kills his fellow men is not motivated by ideology sadistic.
And then What are the reasons that drive someone to kill for an ideal? Discarded clinical reasons, and likewise dismissed the case and that a dictatorship or a foreign invasion to give political cover, we have no explanation for that feeling caging ideological, believing that otherwise could not achieve their political objectives. And how much of it the fault has been that attacks, and how much blame society? Meridian strikes me as a terrorist is not trusted by the population for which it is postulated, which if its support (or part of which was sufficient quantitative significance in institutions) could certainly raise their aspirations, so nonviolent democratic and increase their expectations of success.
Because if they do is claim to take away their political objectives and not merely the right to propose, is that ignore the will of the people. That is a fascist attitude (though now that the fascists used that term, along with the Nazis, to qualify for the Democrats lost credibility. But I still believe fit the case.)
And then what happens is by the head of a murderer ideological moments before death? Does he think that this murder does not denigrate its ideals? What the enemy will pay their armies the next day, seized by fear? That killing the people it claims to defend it on its strategic objectives? It's the closest thing to believe that a flying saucer come to save us ... It is an absurd idea, contradictory, others to sanity, linkable certainly in terms of objectives (Which only he perceived terrorist reachable), in their methods, and as the embodiment of dogma as a single value, a sect of any kind. Nothing is more important than the country, the leader, that faith, that the revolution, that God, who ... is exactly the same irrational behavior.
And what looks for the terrorist killings? The only reasonable option can only be one: to instill fear, not from the enemy, but among its own citizens, among the population which seeks to fight. Their domination through violence. Force for fear her unwavering commitment to the cause (and its methods, frozen in their own project definition), with its ideological core compulsory and fully revealed (in any other way than through dogma, the act of faith, you might consider the fight) Why do not realize at the time that violence has supplanted trial because it has perverted political necessity, emptying it of the necessary critical capacity that defines and justifies any political action? Why can not do without considering the very purpose of his life and his sacred mission on earth ....
And why, at this point of irrationality, what you need (to escape the reflection) is the visceral reaction that we have used the state when los sentimientos razonamiento replaced the policy. Repression, ilegalizaciones, CIERRE of newspapers, anatemización of popular consultations, indiscriminadas arrests. Cree demonstrated its power, but that it is percibe miedo.
More fuel for a fire that does not do something otra retroalimentarse and mutual interesadamente.
