Charlie Hebdo: Gun attack on French magazine kills 12

Are you seriously suggesting that having civilians with firearms on a plane is a good thing?

 

Yeah, because there haven't been any mass shootings at US military installations. Oh, wait.........

 

Yeah, because then only 1000 people would have died, not 3000 That wouldn't have constituted an act of mass terror at all.

 

he's being sarcastic

philosopraptor = scientist
correlation =/= causation

 

That d'oh moment...

 

Nah I was kidding, to be fair though, I'm sure there's someone in the US who actually holds that opinion.

 

not racism but people care when its closer to home

 

I disagree - when it's a terror attack on Europe, we immediately cover it, but when it's a terror attack on the NAACP in Colorado it takes a social media movement to bring attention to the attack. I think that in general, Americans think of Europe as sort of like home, whereas in Africa this sort of violence is expected and unremarkable. Both the distancing from Africa and the distancing from Colorado offices strike me as a problem of empathy for darker skinned folks, or at least, reflect a preconception that terror is something that the third world does to the first world, rather than something that the first world can do to itself.

 

i think its more of a "the west" type of thing.

america (and britain) cares about europe because its "the west". its developed and holds the same origins and ideals. a majority of the population has connections in europe but less so in africa.
on the colorado bit - i cant comment.

but when its an attack on "the west" and "western ideals" then america cares more.

 

The magazine is defiant with it's latest cover showing a picture of Mohammad

 

I don't think this is a racism thing so much as the Charlie Hebdo situation was an attack on free speech, with terrorists attacking reporters for not only depicting Mohammed but also mocking him. This is something relevant to the Western World.

 

Can't be, religion isn't a race

 

The statement that we don't pay attention to whats happening in Africa because they are African not European (ie "black" not "white") makes our reasons racist.

 

Only to those that suit to believe that

 

there are ethno-religious groups but mainstream Islam isn't an ethno-religious group.

judaism is, so by mocking mainstream jews, you can be racist (people can be jewish by ethnic group but not religion and vice-a-versa).

but yeah, we ignore africa because africa is quite disconnected from most of our lives, not because we are racist. if such was true then we would hear less about asian plane crashes.

 

I think our society is very particular about whose free speech rights we protect and when we're willing to make it an issue. Blowing up the NAACP's building for their political efforts is as much a blow against free speech as is shooting up a magazine office - I understand that the latter attack is much more serious because of the deaths involved, what I'm arguing is that both of these are examples of free speech being attacked.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/19/rapper-tiny-doo-faces-prison-time-for-crimes-commi/

Freedom of speech is not applied objectively and equally through our society, but is a malleable concept that is applied as society sees fit. I think that the narrative of "Islamic terrorists threaten freedom of speech" plays better than "Israel bombs press offices" for example:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-drops-sharply-in-annual-press-freedom-ranking/

I uhh, I guess I'd say Africa is disconnected because we are a racist society, but yeah. Systemic and historic, mind, not any sort of personal "Man I hate the Congolese!" thing.

With regard to the ethno-religious thing, I agree, the term's a mess. Still, how do we talk about the oppression and social injustices applied to a minority group? My friend is an atheist lesbian of Middle Eastern descent living in New York City. The fact that she has changed her religion has not stopped her from being hit with a brick because of her phenotype. Racism is a nice shorthand for that sort of thing.

edit: Hell, as long as we're talking about freedom of speech.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28106900

edit 2: It's very easy for me to get upset about this sort of thing. As I've said, our calls for justice are selectively made.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jul/02/israelandthepalestinians.civilliberties

 

You can't be Jewish by ethnic group. You can be by matrilineal descent, but that is not an ethnic group.

 

Some views, alternatives to mainstream media trends: