Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Padre5

What Can Be Done To Change Minds That Are Full Of Hate?

Recommended Posts

There was more news today about terrorism, this time in Yemen. I despair that the leaders of the world can't change the culture of hate that is so prevalent everywhere. Not political leaders, not religious leaders, not the famous. What should people of good will try to do, besides practicing their faith? I spend a lot of time thinking about this issue, as do many other members here, I am sure. And, with all due respect, prayer doesn't seem to do much good. We hosted many children over the years, foster kids, inner city kids and exchange students. I feel that works well, but it's one at a time. What ideas do others have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

I'm sure a big part of it is the foreign policy of many nations towards that area of the world. I can see how people in that part of the world would be a bit irked at innocent people getting drone missiles shot at them, then be declared "collateral damage." I certainly wouldn't tolerate such actions if another country did that here, regardless of that nation's rationale. A lot of these hostile groups seem to only be emboldened with each attack that they perceive as an assault on their way of life, etc. In other words, a lot of them are politically motivated, and may use religion as an excuse to do the things they do, which has its own consequences that feed into hostile feelings on the other side. On and on it goes...

 

At some point, it has to stop.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to think that, on balance, the world was better of by having religion; now I'm not so sure.

 

regards,

 

ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure a big part of it is the foreign policy of many nations towards that area of the world. I can see how people in that part of the world would be a bit irked at innocent people getting drone missiles shot at them, then be declared "collateral damage." I certainly wouldn't tolerate such actions if another country did that here, regardless of that nation's rationale. A lot of these hostile groups seem to only be emboldened with each attack that they perceive as an assault on their way of life, etc. In other words, a lot of them are politically motivated, and may use religion as an excuse to do the things they do, which has its own consequences that feed into hostile feelings on the other side. On and on it goes...

 

At some point, it has to stop.

 

i fully agree on that,

in a black comedy scene: when those guys beeing targeted and killed along with their own families and children, with the most advanced and destructive (peaceful, non-terroristic) weapons, on their own home land, by a forigner armed (peacful) forces. and when tring to complain to their leaders and presedent Ali Abdullah Saleh they found him exchanging kisses and laughs with the killers themselves, what should they do!! other than getting up and defending their lives, themselves. (as terrorists, not free resestance).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to think that, on balance, the world was better of by having religion; now I'm not so sure.

 

regards,

 

ron

 

do you mean if someone killed a non-religion person' children, he won't get up to defend them!!

 

i believe who ever feels opression either physical or mental, he will react in agrissive way, whatever his believes are,

 

yes, to stop this, we have to help removing every unjustified oppression and support the global justice,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you mean if someone killed a non-religion person' children, he won't get up to defend them!!

 

i believe who ever feels opression either physical or mental, he will react in agrissive way, whatever his believes are,

 

yes, to stop this, we have to help removing every unjustified oppression and support the global justice,

 

No, I'm talking generally about violence and disputes being caused by people having diferrent religious faiths/opinions. Fighting because of religion, in other words.

 

regards,

 

ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The religious wars in Europe in the 1500s and 1600s showcase what can happen when you have groups of people that adhere strongly to their belief systems pitted against each other and political authorities. Even during that time period, the differences in beliefs between the groups weren't, on a whole, all that great. Yet it seems like even small differences can cause bloodshed when ideologies are pitted against each other.

 

I think oftentimes the reason there is such intolerance and hate between groups of people is the whole "collectivist" view of the world: everybody is divided into certain groups, many of which are mutually-exclusive. "If you're not a part of my group, then obviously there's something wrong with you." There's also a lack of understanding between people that hold different ideologies, and this lack of understanding leads to erroneous stereotypes that further entrench both sides.

 

In my personal opinion, I believe the problem is the collectivist viewpoint. I try my best to use instead an individualist viewpoint of the world. Although I may adhere to a different philosophy than my neighbor, if someone else that adhered to his philosophy did terrible atrocities, would it be right to assume that the entire group of people who adhere to my neighbor's philosophy are terrible people who will only commit atrocities? The same question could be asked if someone else who adhered to my philosophy performed terrible atrocities.

 

This reminds me of the 1914 Christmas Truce (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_1914_Christmas_truce). Now the British and Germans soldiers in World War I were members of different groups that had different ideologies. They did, however, have something in common: they celebrated Christmas. There were unofficial ceasefires between several units on the front, and they took the time to fraternize and share stories and food with each other. The soldiers got to see their "enemies" up close and personal, and saw that they weren't really all that different. They each had families, friends, jobs, stories, and dreams. Individually, the Germans were just as human as the British. Now the military officers were furious at such fraternization, and so they made sure it never happened again. But for a brief period of time, individuals got to see that other individuals weren't so different after all.

 

I think if we started viewing people as individuals rather than just members of X group, we may begin to strike at the root of all this misunderstanding, hatred, and intolerance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I'm talking generally about violence and disputes being caused by people having diferrent religious faiths/opinions. Fighting because of religion, in other words.

 

regards,

 

ron

 

i believe people fight and dispute because of ideologies, for example the Comunists in the former USSR, China and N-korea did alot of mess to the whole world and their own people.

 

some may like to Dominan and occupy and force the others to follow their ideology or life style, and that will lead to disputes and fight.

 

fight to resist oppression. when a stranger tries to kick you out of your own home to un-justly take it or seize and kill your beloved ones, you will resist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe people fight and dispute because of ideologies, for example the Comunists in the former USSR, China and N-korea did alot of mess to the whole world and their own people.

 

some may like to Dominan and occupy and force the others to follow their ideology or life style, and that will lead to disputes and fight.

 

fight to resist oppression. when a stranger tries to kick you out of your own home to un-justly take it or seize and kill your beloved ones, you will resist.

 

You are right, people dispute about idealogies.

But what is really wrong is when people do not have the heart or inclination to at least try to understand their diferrences for the good of all. That is when they are seen to be lacking - by God or Man.

 

regards,

 

ron

Edited by Ron Shirt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right, people dispute about idealogies.

But what is really wrong is when people do not have the heart or inclination to at least try to understand their diferrences for the good of all. That is when they are seen to be lacking - by God or Man.

 

regards,

 

ron

 

One thing to say is that as the saying goes...it takes two to tango. Sadly in these days, I've seen people claim to want to understand but they make no attempt to actually do so. They make the claim so that they can win points while keeping things the way they are. Politicians are really good at that honestly. I agree with Wanderer though, you can't judge (and I don't like saying that word) a whole group for the actions of one or a few. You take people one at a time.

 

And I say that I hate using that word judge because I believe that the only true judge that exists for spiritual matters is God. I might not like a person's beliefs myself or I might not like things they do...but they are still God's creations. And as such I believe in respecting them as such. At least until they prove they deserve none.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe, this verse, in the holy Quran, is a general verse that tells the Moslem what to do regard to the "OTHER", to know him, discuss, have peaceful relations

 

049.013Y: O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into (different) nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Can Be Done To Change Minds That Are Full Of Hate?

 

Start by not killing them and their families. That usually works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe, this verse, in the holy Quran, is a general verse that tells the Moslem what to do regard to the "OTHER", to know him, discuss, have peaceful relations

 

049.013Y: O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into (different) nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).

 

This seems like a very good and under quoted verse.

 

regards,

 

ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I think about an individualist outlook, I'm always reminded of this instructional video.

 

[media=]

[/media]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Can Be Done To Change Minds That Are Full Of Hate?

 

Start by not killing them and their families. That usually works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was more news today about terrorism, this time in Yemen. I despair that the leaders of the world can't change the culture of hate that is so prevalent everywhere. Not political leaders, not religious leaders, not the famous. What should people of good will try to do, besides practicing their faith?

 

What makes the people of Yemen terrorists but the so called "leaders of the world" better?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes the people of Yemen terrorists but the so called "leaders of the world" better?

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

Not to get too much into politics...but this is exactly WHY I was supporting Ron Paul in the US. Isn't it the truth? Americans would never stand for it, so why should Americans be doing it to other countries? It's sad that people don't think about that. What right is it of one group of people to tell another group how to run their own homes???

 

And the US has a very bad track record of doing those kinds of things. Which no doubt has led to quite a bit of what has happened. I don't think any sane person, when they actually consider how it would feel, would begrudge people defending their homes. Sadly, that doesn't seem to apply to Muslim people in the Middle East. Or really anyone who disagrees with the United States' policies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to get too much into politics...but this is exactly WHY I was supporting Ron Paul in the US. Isn't it the truth? Americans would never stand for it, so why should Americans be doing it to other countries? It's sad that people don't think about that. What right is it of one group of people to tell another group how to run their own homes???

 

And the US has a very bad track record of doing those kinds of things. Which no doubt has led to quite a bit of what has happened. I don't think any sane person, when they actually consider how it would feel, would begrudge people defending their homes. Sadly, that doesn't seem to apply to Muslim people in the Middle East. Or really anyone who disagrees with the United States' policies.

 

Well I'll still continue to support Ron Paul, no matter what happens. You don't find such a principled person like that (in government, at least) very often; he's someone you'd find once every few decades or century. Besides, it's just down between Romney and Paul in the Republican primary process, which will be wrapped up by the end of June, and yet it seems the Romney campaign is panicking strangely over the Paul campaign's delegate wins (for example, the media reported that Ron Paul would have gotten virtually ZERO delegates in Virginia after the primary, yet the total Paul delegates now sits at about 17 due to grassroots efforts at the district conventions). After all, the media and the RNC have already anointed Romney as the "presumptive nominee," so why all the need for lawsuits and challenges if the overall outcome won't be changed? Perhaps with the new revelations that the delegates at the national convention may actually be free to vote their consciences on the first round of voting, regardless of binding, they may be afraid that Romney won't be able to secure the nomination on the first ballot. Nobody knows the true number of Ron Paul delegates that will go to the national convention, so I wouldn't count him out just yet due to the slim chance that he may be able to do what Warren G. Harding did at the 1920 Republican national convention.

 

But you have to wonder what goes through the minds of people that deride the idea that the Golden Rule should be applied to foreign policy, such as what many audience members did at one of the presidential debates in South Carolina when Ron Paul mentioned it. Part of it might be due to the fact that we've never really been invaded by a foreign power since independence. The last major battles we had on American soil were during the American Civil War in the 1860s. 9/11 shook the entire country quite hard because we weren't used to being attacked on our own soil. Most Americans also have no clue what our actual foreign policy has been since at least the 1950s, and so there is a lot of misunderstanding as to why certain groups are hostile towards the United States (I certainly didn't know when it happened!). They don't teach things like Operation Ajax in school.

 

A majority of Americans don't view themselves as "bad people," and without historical context, it seems like there has been unprovoked, illogical hostility against them. So then some come up with reasons such as, "they hate us for our freedom and they're envious of our way of life," and if there doesn't seem to be any other explanation, then that HAS to be it, right? The only thing is, 20th century U.S. foreign policy has been all about intervening in the internal affairs of other nations by propping up dictators, blocking trade, and barring food and medicine to reach suffering people. From the perspective of those in the Middle East, who I'm sure a majority don't view themselves as "bad people," it seems like there has been unprovoked, illogical hostility against them. And on and on and on...

 

It has to stop.

Edited by Wanderer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'll still continue to support Ron Paul, no matter what happens. You don't find such a principled person like that (in government, at least) very often; he's someone you'd find once every few decades or century. Besides, it's just down between Romney and Paul in the Republican primary process, which will be wrapped up by the end of June, and yet it seems the Romney campaign is panicking strangely over the Paul campaign's delegate wins (for example, the media reported that Ron Paul would have gotten virtually ZERO delegates in Virginia after the primary, yet the total Paul delegates now sits at about 17 due to grassroots efforts at the district conventions). After all, the media and the RNC have already anointed Romney as the "presumptive nominee," so why all the need for lawsuits and challenges if the overall outcome won't be changed? Perhaps with the new revelations that the delegates at the national convention may actually be free to vote their consciences on the first round of voting, regardless of binding, they may be afraid that Romney won't be able to secure the nomination on the first ballot. Nobody knows the true number of Ron Paul delegates that will go to the national convention, so I wouldn't count him out just yet due to the slim chance that he may be able to do what Warren G. Harding did at the 1920 Republican national convention.

 

But you have to wonder what goes through the minds of people that deride the idea that the Golden Rule should be applied to foreign policy, such as what many audience members did at one of the presidential debates in South Carolina when Ron Paul mentioned it. Part of it might be due to the fact that we've never really been invaded by a foreign power since independence. The last major battles we had on American soil were during the American Civil War in the 1860s. 9/11 shook the entire country quite hard because we weren't used to being attacked on our own soil. Most Americans also have no clue what our actual foreign policy has been since at least the 1950s, and so there is a lot of misunderstanding as to why certain groups are hostile towards the United States (I certainly didn't know when it happened!). They don't teach things like Operation Ajax in school.

 

A majority of Americans don't view themselves as "bad people," and without historical context, it seems like there has been unprovoked, illogical hostility against them. So then some come up with reasons such as, "they hate us for our freedom and they're envious of our way of life," and if there doesn't seem to be any other explanation, then that HAS to be it, right? The only thing is, 20th century U.S. foreign policy has been all about intervening in the internal affairs of other nations by propping up dictators, blocking trade, and barring food and medicine to reach suffering people. From the perspective of those in the Middle East, who I'm sure a majority don't view themselves as "bad people," it seems like there has been unprovoked, illogical hostility against them. And on and on and on...

 

It has to stop.

 

I agree...and I plan to vote RP no matter what but I didn't want to get into the politics too much. But you're right. My fear is that Romney is already rattling a saber towards Iran, Obama still keeps saying we need to have a military presence in the Middle East, and I don't see the issue getting better.

 

Now I know from talking to many American soldiers (my own cousin is an Air Force PJ), most of them support RP because they DON'T want to be over there. They want to come home, which is a good thing. That would certainly help improve things between the US and the rest of the world I'd think.

 

Also, my mother is a coordinator for an exchange student organization (PAX) and while she refuses to ever place a Muslim student because of her own prejudices, but there was an article written in their May newsletter (if it gets posted online, I'll be more than happy to show it here) written by a family from Iowa who had a Pakistani boy. In the course of hosting him, they learned about Islam for real, from the source, and the article even mentions that one day all the family went out dressed in typical garb of Pakistan. The host mother wrote that it was a life-changing experience because her and her daughter wore a hijab for the first time and were treated with respect because people perceived them as Muslim while wearing that.

 

I just thought that was a nice story to showcase that by and large, things are slowly getting better when people actually get to know someone who is different. If we can put actual faces to different people instead of allowing the media to demonize them, then we can begin the process of growing closer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×