Holy Warriors,
I read a little excerpt about holy warriors, and I find it ironic that clearly to a their own people: extremist jihadists are holy warriors. What greater sacrifice can an individual contribute than their own llife? (but my own answer to that rhetorical question is very different.)
What the excerpt says about holy warriors is what everyone thinks about them. Searching for an Ideal, someone to fill our traditional expectations of what is good in an ever shifting and changing present. Basically: "I want flint and steel" when everything is wet and we have gasoline and a lighter.
Tradition is safe, it is what we grew up in, it is what we were taught to follow, it is what we assume to be right. Isn't there a better way to learn what is right? Isn't there a way to be able to adapt to the massively growing information that is continuously testing our assumptions to a point of constant uncertainty.
Civ 4. Looking back at my Civilization 4 game, playing the Byzantine Empire in the 1000AD senario I went along with the Hereditary Rule, Feudalism and Theocracy. Once I got Cairo, I went to Police State basically creating a very scary world to live in where the despot (me) had unlimited power in both private and public life. It let me live in constant war consuming and converting all my enemies.
Basically the leaders became God Emperors with a plunder based economy. Eventually I outdid my european allies in Religous Politics wrestling control of the Apostic State continually. Although cavalry was only in use up until 1500, by 1400 I was already using Real world 18C riflemen. I ended the game late, intentionally, because I wanted to Imagine World War II armaments with religous designs like prayers, crosses, stylized in 11C crusader aesthetics.
It was a fun excercise in reimagining all the elements in how they would fit in a setting. Imaging how Byzantine Riflemen would look like in 13C, or how Cuirasers would look if they evolved from Cataphraks instead of Knights. Then there is the Culture that is highly developed, imagining how a day in the life of average people in such a world is quite fun. Wondering what kind of drama they live in and how the civilization affects their lives is a fun challenge when I are try to apply what learned in how technology affects culture and vise versa.
What the excerpt says about holy warriors is what everyone thinks about them. Searching for an Ideal, someone to fill our traditional expectations of what is good in an ever shifting and changing present. Basically: "I want flint and steel" when everything is wet and we have gasoline and a lighter.
Tradition is safe, it is what we grew up in, it is what we were taught to follow, it is what we assume to be right. Isn't there a better way to learn what is right? Isn't there a way to be able to adapt to the massively growing information that is continuously testing our assumptions to a point of constant uncertainty.
Civ 4. Looking back at my Civilization 4 game, playing the Byzantine Empire in the 1000AD senario I went along with the Hereditary Rule, Feudalism and Theocracy. Once I got Cairo, I went to Police State basically creating a very scary world to live in where the despot (me) had unlimited power in both private and public life. It let me live in constant war consuming and converting all my enemies.
Basically the leaders became God Emperors with a plunder based economy. Eventually I outdid my european allies in Religous Politics wrestling control of the Apostic State continually. Although cavalry was only in use up until 1500, by 1400 I was already using Real world 18C riflemen. I ended the game late, intentionally, because I wanted to Imagine World War II armaments with religous designs like prayers, crosses, stylized in 11C crusader aesthetics.
It was a fun excercise in reimagining all the elements in how they would fit in a setting. Imaging how Byzantine Riflemen would look like in 13C, or how Cuirasers would look if they evolved from Cataphraks instead of Knights. Then there is the Culture that is highly developed, imagining how a day in the life of average people in such a world is quite fun. Wondering what kind of drama they live in and how the civilization affects their lives is a fun challenge when I are try to apply what learned in how technology affects culture and vise versa.
SAB. too bad that people don't see that they need those benefits and rights. I still think that deep inside these people cannot accept it because they are not open to dialog and getting to know the other side of the fence. Winning them over is not about politics but removing the notion of a "threat". The "Storm is Comming" mantra is meant to fuel that threat, but thats easily negated when the other party tries to talk about the matter instead of fighting about it.
In the my understanding of diplomatic forces at work: one side bends back. In this case, one side begins a dialog: to show that there is no threat and to make them come close enough to see that they are fighting against people (not just contrary "Ideals"). These people are serious and like to be taken seriously, but because of social perception, they cannot just refuse a dialog especially when it can be made to make them look like badguys. Once they are in dialog they will argue till they're blue in the face about their rights, their traditions, their comforts and their life... without even considering the other party. Let them, until they hear themselves tell themselves that its all about them and nothing about sharing the rights to live just as happily or respected. they are prepared to debunk any argument the other side will throw at them, they are not prepared for the inherent truth that they only want to protect the image of their world at the cost of others.
Comments
Post a Comment