Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Orson Scott Card: Fanatic Terrorism from the Past
Rhinoceros Times, Greensboro, NC ^ | 10/30/2003 | Orson Scott Card

Posted on 11/03/2003 7:47:07 AM PST by Tolik

Fanatic Terrorism from the Past

by Orson Scott Card

Our current war against terrorism is not the first time that Western civilization has faced a widespread terrorist threat.

A century ago, there were bombings and assassinations all over Europe and America. Followers of a radical, utopian ideology (and the wackos who used that ideology as an excuse for murder) murdered a tsar of Russia, a president of the United States, a president of France, a premier of Spain, an empress of Austria, a king of Italy and various lesser officials.

They also, occasionally, attacked random innocent civilians. The man who killed one person and injured 20 others with a bomb he placed in the Cafe Terminus in Paris said he chose that site because there came “all those who are satisfied with the established order, all the accomplices and employees of Property and the State, ... all that mass of good little bourgeois who make 300 to 500 francs a month, who are more reactionary than their masters, who hate the poor and range themselves on the side of the strong.” (Quoted in Barbara W. Tuchman, The Proud Tower, p. 93.)

This group of terrorists called themselves “Anarchists,” and their enemy was all government.

Why? Because they believed that all the evils of human life were caused by the interference of governments, which were merely tools of the rich to harm the common people. Strike down those governments, and the common people would, they believed, quickly establish a fair system of sharing the wealth and living in freedom.

Never mind that it is impossible for people to live together without government. Strike down one set of rulers, and quickly another emerges in its place – and usually not a very nice one, either.

Look what happened when communism fell in Russia: Almost at once, former Communists and opportunistic newcomers created the Russian mafia, which in the absence of legitimate state power came close to reinventing feudalism amid the ruins of the Soviet economy.

And the government that now struggles to restore public order and safety while protecting a nascent new economy is far more authoritarian than any of the pro-democracy forces in Russia ever wanted to see.

Power vacuums are always filled. The trick is to try to fill them with people who accept strict limitations on their own behavior – in other words, rulers who obey the law and relinquish power without being forced to.

But the Anarchists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries just didn’t see that.

Oh, the earliest and brightest of the theorists gradually came to realize their mistake, and eventually began urging people not to act upon their earlier teachings.

Because those teachings were incendiary indeed. What they preached was a doctrine of assassination and disruption. And that message – that the powerful and rich deserved to die for their crimes against the working people – could not be retracted easily.

After all, the terrorists were not converted to the writers, but to the ideas themselves. And the fact that the writers later repudiated the extremism of their early works only told their followers that the evil rulers of the world had co-opted them.

Fighting the Anarchists was devilishly hard. Why? Because by their very ideology, they refused to organize. Organization was the evil they fought against. So unlike the communists, who organized for revolution, or the socialists, who organized to try to win political power within the existing system, the Anarchists simply did not organize at all.

Therefore each bomber and each knife- or gun-wielding assassin acted completely alone. Most told no one in advance what they planned to do. When they were arrested, they couldn’t inform on any other Anarchist terrorists because they didn’t know any.

So the whole organization consisted of:

How does a government fight a “conspiracy” like that? How do ordinary decent people respond to it?

In Spain, hundreds of “enemies of the state” were arrested – some of them actual Anarchists – and many were tortured to the point where they confessed anything. Even advocating Anarchism through speeches, pictures or publications could get you a life sentence.

This didn’t stop the Anarchists. In fact, that was when the Spanish premier who had initiated the harsh anti-Anarchist measures was assassinated ... by an Anarchist.

When US President McKinley was assassinated by an Anarchist, it brought into office Theodore Roosevelt, who declared, “Anarchism is a crime against the whole human race and all mankind should band against the Anarchist.”

As historian Barbara Tuchman writes, Roosevelt “urged that Anarchist speeches, writings and meetings should henceforth be treated as seditious, that Anarchists should no longer be allowed at large, those already in the country should be deported, Congress should ‘exclude absolutely all persons who are known to be believers in Anarchistic principles or members of Anarchistic societies,’ and their advocacy of killing should by treaty be made an offense against international law, like piracy” (ibid., pp. 107-8).

His views were not universally agreed with. Many were appalled by the laws that resulted; many urged that the way to combat Anarchism was to ameliorate the suffering of the working classes that provided some (but not all) of the recruits to the cause.

In some ways, the Anarchists were easier to deal with than today’s organized terrorists. After all, there’s a limit to what one person can do alone. Even the suicide bombers in Israel don’t have to study bomb-making – there are organizations that provide them with their deadly but concealable weapons.

So the immediate damage Anarchist terrorists could do was relatively small – though their ability to get close enough to important or highly visible world leaders to kill them was uncanny.

But the public didn’t care that the damage was, in the long run, relatively minor. There was widespread fury that bordered on mob rage, and fear that sometimes came close to panic.

At the same time, civil libertarians and the supporters of nonviolent (or less violent) labor movements were horrified at the actions governments took to fight Anarchism.

In Russia, where Anarchist assassinations came in the midst of a war with Japan, the government used the time-honored tactic of blaming the Jews, leading to pogroms: murders and beatings of Jews who had nothing whatever to do with Anarchism. (Who, after all, is more committed to the rule of law than orthodox Jews?)

Governments could not fight Anarchism without, in effect, becoming terrorists themselves, but governments that failed to fight Anarchism found themselves faced with public outrage – and a very serious threat of being targeted for assassination themselves.

By contrast, today’s terrorists are organized and supplied by governments and wealthy donors. They are supported by large numbers of Muslim extremists among the common people in nations whose governments make no effort to persuade them to do otherwise.

Unlike the governments who fought Anarchism, governments committed to fighting today’s brand of terrorism actually have someone to legitimately fight: terrorist organizations and the nations that harbor and support them.

But at the same time, just as it happened a century ago, the governments of the civilized world are divided against each other and riven with internal dissent.

What finally ended Anarchism as a source of terrorism?

World War I. Bloody revolutions in Russia and elsewhere. Fascism.

Nothing like having a million men die in the trenches, or having the population oppressed by state terrorism far worse than the feeble efforts of Anarchists, or suffering through the chaos of genuine, bloody anarchy.

All the ideas of the Anarchists were disproven or shown to be trivial.

My fear is that the only way to end the wave of terrorism that is finding recruits among impoverished and frustrated and extremist Muslims in so many nations of the world will be similar.

The best answer to extremist Muslim views is to live in a country ruled by extremist Muslims. Citizens of Iran under the ayatollahs and Afghanistan under the Taliban are far less likely a recruiting ground for anti-Western terrorism.

But the fanatical Taliban and the fascist Ba’ath parties were not brought down by internal revolution – they were brought down by outside invasion (with much cooperation from the people who hated the fanatic regimes).

And I fear that the only thing that will cure the Muslim people of their current love affair with terrorism (for even though the terrorists are few, those who openly sympathize with their barbarities are many, and their critics are virtually silent) is the savagery of total war.

The only alternative is the kind of limited, surgical war that America has been waging in Afghanistan and Iraq. The cost of such a war is not trivial, but it is also not total.

But if America and Britain lose heart and do not complete this kind of war, the terrorists will regard our retreat as proof that they were right and Allah supports their actions. More terrorism will surely follow, and the war we failed to complete now our children will have to complete later – and under far less advantageous circumstances.

The terrorists want a world war between all of Islam and everybody else, because they believe that in such a war Allah will give them the victory and the entire world will become Muslim (or at least be ruled by Muslims).

So leaving them alone will not cause them to leave us alone – it will encourage them to provoke us more.

Giving more aid or support to Muslim nations will not be seen as generosity, it will be seen as tribute or ransom money, and the credit will go to the terrorists ... thereby inviting further acts of terror. (This is the pattern that the Palestinian terrorists have already demonstrated for years.)

That is the thing that the advocates of “peace” just don’t seem to understand: Peace cannot be achieved unilaterally. When an enemy is determined to make war – even a pathetically weak and under-armed enemy – then a war will be fought ... or the enemy will become your conqueror.

War postponed never becomes easier to fight, or less costly in lives and treasure. And those who mock President Bush as a “cowboy” or even, insanely, claim that America (or “the Jews”) staged 9-11 just so we’d have an excuse for war will not, if their views prevail, bring about peace. They will simply bring about far more death.

And if we abandon this war, then a day will almost certainly come when all of us will look back with deep regret to the time when we might have rid the world of the scourge of extremist Muslim terrorism (meanwhile liberating more than a few Muslim nations from tyranny) at the astonishingly slight cost in blood and horror, compared to most wars, that we have paid so far in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But we’re Americans. We neither study history nor learn from it.

Orson Scott Card, author of more than 50 books of fiction, has lived in Greensboro since 1983.

 


 

Orson Scott Card's books:  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author=Card%2C%20Orson%20Scott/104-5282811-9936710

Orson Scott CardRead about him

His websites:  literature: http://www.hatrack.com/ and politics: http://www.ornery.org/index.html

FreeRepublic posts: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/k-orsonscottcard/browse


Double Standards -- Arnold, Israel, Bush -10-05-03 
Death by Government -09-28-03 
We Can Lose This War After All -09-21-03 
MP3s Are Not the Devil - Part 2 -09-14-03 
MP3s Are Not the Devil -09-07-03 
The Best Universities and a Good Education -08-31-03 
Are Israelis the Palestinian Police? -08-24-03 
Community Theatre and the "F" Word -08-10-03 
Ideological Labels -- What Do They Mean? -08-03-03 
How the Press Makes America Look Bad Even When It Isn't -07-28-03 
Truth, Lies, and the story of an Ethiopian-American -07-21-03 
Cool New Rights Are Fine, but What About Democracy? -06-30-03 
Judges, filibusters, and Hillary -06-23-03 
Moral Stupidity -06-16-03 
Global Hawks and Raptors -05-26-03 
Who Is Preparing for Worldwide War? -05-19-03 
Anti-Americans, Paradise, and Cheap Tuition -05-12-03 
Forcing Freedom on the Faithful -04-28-03 
What If It All Goes Right? -04-21-03 
Imperial America? -04-14-03 
It Ain't Over Till It's Over -04-07-03 
How to Keep Your Perspective When the Media Lose Theirs -03-31-03 
The Most Careful of All Wars -03-24-03 
Brokaw, Practical Idealism, and France -03-17-03 
Awe, Shock, the U.N., and NATO -03-10-03 
Turkey and Germany and "Kill-Crazy" Leaders -03-03-03 
What Will "Victory" Look Like? -02-24-03 
"Hate Groups for Peace" and Other Mistakes -02-17-03 
Are Inspections Working? Is It All About Oil? -02-10-03 
Sarandon, Garafolo, Mandela -- McCarthyism of the Left -02-03-03 
Lessons of War: Anybody Can Lose -01-27-03 
Affirmative Action and the American Soul -01-20-03 
Government and the "Free Market" -01-13-03 
Why We Won't Invade North Korea -01-06-03 
Anti-missiles, Material Breaches, and Segregationist Feelings -12-23-02 
Intelligence "Failures" and the Blame Game -12-16-02 
Al-Qaeda's Secret Message to America -12-09-02 
Missiles and Palestinian Opinion Polls -12-02-02 
Poindexter's Ounce-of-Prevention Project -11-25-02 
When Is Saddam "On the Verge"? -11-18-02 
Where Do the Parties Go Now? -11-11-02 
Dumb "Wisdom" -11-04-02 
The Rule of Law -10-28-02 
Leadership and the Elections of 2002 -10-21-02 
Letter from an American Muslim -10-14-02 
An Open Letter to the People of Europe -10-07-02 
Torricelli and the Election - 09-30-02 
Strategy - 09-23-02 
Iraq: Deterrence or Prevention? - 09-16-02 
Why We Need a Free Press During Wartime - 09-09-02 
The First Year of the Terrorist War - 09-02-02 
Religious Tolerance - 08-26-02 
Evil and the "Phony War" - 08-19-02 
Defending Our Professors from the Anti-Intellectuals - 08-12-02 
Civilization, Part II -- Responsibility - 08-05-02 
Civilization, Part I - 07-29-02 
Phil Donahue and the Left and the Right - 07-22-02 
Declaring War - 07-15-02 
American Imams - 07-08-02 
Bold Moves That Just Might Work - 07-01-02 
Can We Build a High Enough Wall? - 06-24-02 
You Can't Have Peace When the Enemy Wants War - 06-17-02 
Being Buddies with the Bad Guys - 06-03-02 
What Bush Should Have Done - 05-20-02 
Two Modest Proposals - 05-13-02 
Making Monsters - 05-06-02 
Lies and Truth - 04-29-02 
Borders Drawn in Blood - 04-22-02 
Is Organized Religion the Enemy? - 04-15-02 
What Causes People to Become Terrorists? - 04-08-02 
April 1, 2002 - 04-01-02 
Anti-Semitism? Nah ... - 03-25-02 
Live with Yasser and Geraldo - 03-11-02 
This Ain't Cops & Robbers - 03-04-02 
Science and Freedom of the Press - 02-25-02 
Nail Clippers, Pinheads, and Weapons of Terror - 02-18-02 
Looking the Other Way - 02-11-02 
The Best in the World Can Still Be Lousy - 02-04-02 
How the World Ends ... - 01-28-02 
Cynical vs. Idealistic - 01-21-02 
American Peace - 01-14-02 
Are We the Bad Guy? - 01-07-02 
The China Nightmare - 12-31-01 
The War Book of the Year - 12-24-01 
What Afghanistan? - 12-17-01 
An Israeli Speaks - 12-10-01 
Jews, Christians, Civilians, and the Qur'an - 12-03-01 
Can America Win the Culture War? - 11-26-01 
Revisionist History - 11-19-01 
What Can Go Wrong - 11-12-01 
Enough Blame to Go Around - 11-05-01 
Why We Should Not Rebuild on the Site of the World Trade Center - 10-29-01 
The American Media and the War - 10-22-01 
Religious Hatred - 10-15-01 
How Will We Know If We Won? - 10-08-01

 

 


TOPICS: Editorial; Israel; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: anarchism; anarchists; history; iraq; israel; muslim; orsonscottcard; osc; terrorism; waronterror; westerncivilization; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

1 posted on 11/03/2003 7:47:07 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Ender's Game Bump.
2 posted on 11/03/2003 7:53:05 AM PST by tort_feasor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl; dennisw; SJackson; knighthawk; yonif
Orson Scott Card:

The terrorists want a world war between all of Islam and everybody else, because they believe that in such a war Allah will give them the victory and the entire world will become Muslim (or at least be ruled by Muslims).

So leaving them alone will not cause them to leave us alone – it will encourage them to provoke us more.

Giving more aid or support to Muslim nations will not be seen as generosity, it will be seen as tribute or ransom money, and the credit will go to the terrorists ... thereby inviting further acts of terror. (This is the pattern that the Palestinian terrorists have already demonstrated for years.)

That is the thing that the advocates of “peace” just don’t seem to understand: Peace cannot be achieved unilaterally. When an enemy is determined to make war – even a pathetically weak and under-armed enemy – then a war will be fought ... or the enemy will become your conqueror.

War postponed never becomes easier to fight, or less costly in lives and treasure. And those who mock President Bush as a “cowboy” or even, insanely, claim that America (or “the Jews”) staged 9-11 just so we’d have an excuse for war will not, if their views prevail, bring about peace. They will simply bring about far more death.

And if we abandon this war, then a day will almost certainly come when all of us will look back with deep regret to the time when we might have rid the world of the scourge of extremist Muslim terrorism (meanwhile liberating more than a few Muslim nations from tyranny) at the astonishingly slight cost in blood and horror, compared to most wars, that we have paid so far in Afghanistan and Iraq.


3 posted on 11/03/2003 7:54:24 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing.
4 posted on 11/03/2003 7:54:41 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (CCCP = clinton, chiraq, chretien, and putin = stalin wannabes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Card has always been one of my favorite authors. Enders Game is brilliant in both its complexity and simplicity...
5 posted on 11/03/2003 7:55:20 AM PST by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: superflu
another brilliant essay from Orson Scott Card
6 posted on 11/03/2003 7:58:00 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
That is the thing that the advocates of “peace” just don’t seem to understand: Peace cannot be achieved unilaterally. When an enemy is determined to make war – even a pathetically weak and under-armed enemy – then a war will be fought ... or the enemy will become your conqueror.

Self-evident, and still not understood by the left.

7 posted on 11/03/2003 8:01:13 AM PST by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran; Big Guy and Rusty 99; Bulldogger
He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing.

Hmmm, overall, I agree with you, but I think romance novels with the busty wenches and half-naked musclemen on their covers are just as bad, if not slightly worse.

8 posted on 11/03/2003 8:06:30 AM PST by RepoGirl (Rotties rule)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
"He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing"

What documentation can you offer that "fantasy" is the lowest form of writing as compared to your personal opinion?

Is this article to be compared to the "Letters to the Editor" that appear in Hustler magazine as an example of fantasy?
9 posted on 11/03/2003 8:06:47 AM PST by LaMudBug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Excellent article, and very much to the point.

Card is a terrific writer. I recommend "Ender's Game," of course. Also "Wyrms," a terrific fantasy that is less well known, maybe my favorite of his books. Just read the first chapter and you'll be hooked. Also "Seventh Son." I don't think the sequels to Ender's Game and Seventh Son are quite as good as the first books, but it's a very high level to follow.
10 posted on 11/03/2003 8:08:16 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing.

The majority of his books may be in the fantasy genre, but they are about much, much more than "space aliens"...

11 posted on 11/03/2003 8:08:16 AM PST by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
So, what are your points of contention? What exactly you did not like in this article?. Any substantiated thoughts?

Did you actually read the article posted here?

12 posted on 11/03/2003 8:11:45 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
As Aristotle points out, fiction or "poetry" describes actions that are probable, not factual--or in other terms, how men SHOULD act rather than how they accidentally did act in history. This is sometimes referred to as the deeper truth of fiction.

Some of the world's greatest literature has a high element of the fantastic--Homer's Odyssey, to take a prime example.

The best fantasy, such as The Lord of the Rings, touches on the truth at the very deepest level. It's worth more than a thousand trashy "realistic" novels such as you are likely to find by mainstream fiction writers today.
13 posted on 11/03/2003 8:11:55 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LaMudBug
Being a bookworm since 10 years of age. I have read all types of books. The only type of books that I have not
finished were fantasy and romance novels.
If by mistake I pick up a fantasy book at my used book store ( I will buy 20 or thirty at a time ) I toss it.
So it is a personal opinion based on 53 years of reading
at least 300 books a year.
14 posted on 11/03/2003 8:16:57 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (CCCP = clinton, chiraq, chretien, and putin = stalin wannabes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Unfortunately for us, people these days don't have the courage and common sense of our great-grandparents. Today we are afraid to kill ANY muslum, lest we be called racist.
15 posted on 11/03/2003 8:19:00 AM PST by Democratshavenobrains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Bump
16 posted on 11/03/2003 8:19:26 AM PST by null and void
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
bttt
17 posted on 11/03/2003 8:40:17 AM PST by yonif ("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rose in RoseBear
Good analysis ping...
18 posted on 11/03/2003 8:44:12 AM PST by Bear_in_RoseBear (Archivist to the Hobbit Hole)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
Since you only read books purchased at second hand stores—why should anyone in the writing trade care what you think?
19 posted on 11/03/2003 8:48:36 AM PST by duvausa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Intersting article. I'd never read anything by him before.

War postponed never becomes easier to fight, or less costly in lives and treasure.

Good point.

20 posted on 11/03/2003 8:50:17 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
So, why not say simply that you do not like fantasy writing?
21 posted on 11/03/2003 8:53:49 AM PST by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: duvausa
I also buy many new books but I am more discerning when
buying new books.
22 posted on 11/03/2003 8:54:45 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (CCCP = clinton, chiraq, chretien, and putin = stalin wannabes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
That's why I say play the endgame now. Take the Jihadists at their word. Take out Mecca, Medina, Qom tomorrow. And the Iranian nuclear program too. We do it or Israel does it. Destroy Allah's holy sites and you show him to be an impotent, lamer moon god not worth getting all worked up over.

Quite possibly our economy would do great after the curse of Islamic terror is lifted.
23 posted on 11/03/2003 9:16:02 AM PST by dennisw (G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
I am not sure we'll have the balls to do it even we hit with 10 times of 9-11.

Look at Israel. They have no shortage of their own useful idiots despite constant threat of terror. And presumably right-wing government won't offer anything better than  half-measures at best.

24 posted on 11/03/2003 9:27:31 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
But have you read Card?
25 posted on 11/03/2003 9:39:04 AM PST by JmyBryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing.

What fiction is not Fantasy?
At least Card's is honestly labeled, that puts him one step up on wriers of thrillers, mysteries, or 'serious fiction'.

So9

26 posted on 11/03/2003 9:40:08 AM PST by Servant of the 9 (The voices tell me to stay home and clean the guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Take out Mecca, Medina, Qom tomorrow. And the Iranian nuclear program too.

Absolutely 100% correct. The muslims' faith needs to be totally destroyed. Just as the Jap emperor in WW2 was shown to be only a man, and not a deity.

Islam needs to be viewed as a political philosophy, like fascism or communism, and not as a legitimate religion.

I would also like to add the Dome of the Rock to your hitlist.

27 posted on 11/03/2003 9:40:18 AM PST by 10mm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
I am afraid going to the 'hoof and mouth disease' remedy is the only way we are gonna beat this.

Time for the 'cowboy' President to play 'Cowboys and Muslims'

So9

28 posted on 11/03/2003 9:43:15 AM PST by Servant of the 9 (The voices tell me to stay home and clean the guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
Fantasy as the lowest form of writing?
You show me how inventing a whole language and writing form is low.
Tolkien did just that, repeatedly.
Especially as a member of the writing group The Inklings.

I take it that your reading is not for entertainment.
After all, entertainment and imagination would be low as well.
29 posted on 11/03/2003 9:54:06 AM PST by Darksheare (DemUn, justification for exorcism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9; Tolik
"So leaving them alone will not cause them to leave us alone – it will encourage them to provoke us more."

That's correct.
And I was flamed for saying that before, but hey.
Truth is never popular.
One can only hope that we have the guts to see this through, regardless of what the left delusionates about.
(Yes, coining a word. 'Delusionates', hysterical fantasizing about failure, and how they can use it to regain power.)
30 posted on 11/03/2003 9:57:39 AM PST by Darksheare (DemUn, justification for exorcism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 10mm
Once Allah shows he has abandoned them by letting Mecca be obliterated, Dome of the Rock will be torn down stone by stone by angry crazed Muslim mobs.
31 posted on 11/03/2003 10:17:17 AM PST by dennisw (G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
The only type of books that I have not finished were fantasy and romance novels.

I can't tell you how happy we are all that you took time out of your busy reading schedule to come here and tell us all that you don't like fantasy.

32 posted on 11/03/2003 10:20:42 AM PST by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
"If by mistake I pick up a fantasy book at my used book store ( I will buy 20 or thirty at a time ) I toss it. So it is a personal opinion based on 53 years of reading at least 300 books a year."

Sturgeon's Law, only the ratio of good stuff to c*** is lower.

I take it you didn't like Tolkien, either.

33 posted on 11/03/2003 10:30:46 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing.

Give me a break! "Gulliver's Travels", the entire Jules Verne opus? Tom Clancy's "Debt of Honor" was eerily prophetic. Robert Heinlein is brilliant, his works are about so much more than the apparent topic.

34 posted on 11/03/2003 10:49:19 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Uday and Qusay and Idi-ay are ead-day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Card brings back a forgotten period of history and raises some good points, but his conclusions are highly confused. He writes: "The best answer to extremist Muslim views is to live in a country ruled by extremist Muslims. Citizens of Iran under the ayatollahs and Afghanistan under the Taliban are far less likely a recruiting ground for anti-Western terrorism." If this is true, most of his other conclusions aren't. And vice versa, though it's possible that neither is entirely true. At any rate, he's very confused in his prescription.

The nub of his argument seems to be here: "The terrorists want a world war between all of Islam and everybody else, because they believe that in such a war Allah will give them the victory and the entire world will become Muslim (or at least be ruled by Muslims)." Is this true? Is it necessarily likely to remain true? Others have seen the conflict as involving more specific issues, and see wars like the current one as simply making things worse.

I can't say Card's entirely wrong. He captures the fanaticism of the terrorists better than those who'd argue against him. But it does look as though he's in over his head. He has to take into account the factors (short of annihilation) that break or inhibit or dissipate fanaticism and make it possible for people of different religions to live together, and it doesn't look like he has.

35 posted on 11/03/2003 11:21:56 AM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x
Thank you for your interesting points.

The nub of his argument seems to be here: "The terrorists want a world war between all of Islam and everybody else, because they believe that in such a war Allah will give them the victory and the entire world will become Muslim (or at least be ruled by Muslims)." Is this true? Is it necessarily likely to remain true? Others have seen the conflict as involving more specific issues, and see wars like the current one as simply making things worse.

I remember that Osama's inspirations could have been well summarized this way. To a question [paraphrasing]: what should we do to accommodate you? He answered: first, you must convert to Islam.  Than he followed with a long list of requirements to us. After reading the first answer, I am not sure there is a point to continue with more specific issues. Thanks, but no thanks.

I don't think it is true for all muslims, but those who are actively against the West are recipients of mullah's propaganda stating just that.

I don't think he is over his head neither. He is very consistent in his politics writings. See any of his articles I linked. He publishes them almost weekly since 9-11-01. He would want nothing else that for muslims to stop terror ways and to live peacefully with neighbors. How?

His own solution for the Mideast problems (as he writes in his articles and his SF book "Shadow puppets") is for muslims to accept Israel as Allah-sent cousins that Allah wants to serve as a conduit to the Western accomplishments that can be used by muslims without compromising many of their own ways. (This is how they can reconcile Jews and Allah: He wants them there for a reason!). Sound utopian. Yes (and count me as skeptic too). BUT, what in their fanatical believes IS NOT utopian? (Somebody can probably find a Quran quote to support Cards idea). With unquestionable propaganda coming out from mullahs every day, what their brainwashed subjects would do if mullahs would change a tone? Of course, in his book, he shows that they had a change of heart AFTER a terrible war !?! under a threat of a total annihilation. !?!

Forgive my cynicism, but I definitely agree with his point that this war is on us. Better to fight it now on our terms, than wait and see, Because waiting can be interpreted only as our weakness. And we will pay much greater price later.

36 posted on 11/03/2003 12:16:06 PM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Thank you for your response. I agree with you about the necessity of using force to deal with terrorism, and about the fact that not all Muslims are terrorists. Card's overall view as you express it has much sense in it. But I have to wonder if his tactics will help him to achieve that end. It could certainly be argued that if we make ourselves the issue and stand at center stage, we'll become more of a target than if we downplay our own importance and stick to our own defense. I don't know if his vision will work in the end, though. Two peoples can be convinced that the other is put there to help them achieve their own purpose and yet still be at daggers drawn, because they disagree over who is the means and who has or is the end or goal.
37 posted on 11/03/2003 2:36:46 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Comment #38 Removed by Moderator

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
I thought of Ender's Game as science fiction rather than fantasy. No matter, to me it is one of the best fiction books of any genre I have ever read. It has actually been described by some as a treatise on leadership. This is one of those rare science fiction books that has been embraced by people who don't particularly care for science fiction. Why not borrow a copy from your local library and give it a try? :)
39 posted on 11/11/2003 8:40:01 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tort_feasor
First thing I thought of, too.

Actually, I thought of it shortly post-9/11, as well.
40 posted on 11/11/2003 8:44:47 PM PST by FreedomPoster (this space intentionally blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Interestingly enough, Card is a Democrat.
41 posted on 11/11/2003 8:47:30 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 10mm
Islam needs to be viewed as a political philosophy, like fascism or communism, and not as a legitimate religion.

Exactly. My rant:

We're dealing with an evil, totalitarian, dictatorial, murderous political system masquerading as a religion. Just the treatment of women in Islamic societies should tell you all you need to know about this "culture". Add in their intolerance of non-believers, and it becomes obvious what a rational tolerance policy might look like.

Personally, I will become tolerant of Islam when there are churches and synagogues in Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Islamabad, Karachi, Cairo, Khartoum, and similar locales, and the locals aren't trying to burn down the structures and kill the attendees.

For now, here's where I'm at on the subject. The math works.

+

=

42 posted on 11/11/2003 8:50:51 PM PST by FreedomPoster (this space intentionally blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
Yeah, but you didn't say what the highest form of writing is. Inquiring minds want to know (what you think).
43 posted on 11/11/2003 8:52:20 PM PST by Sam Cree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
If you cnsider that the Re Chinese are a part of this mix too...and are definitely up to abetting the terrorists and the radical muslims as a tool in distracting us to their own purposes...then you have a recipe for World War if we do not hold firmly to the current path.

And that is the premise for my own Dragon's Fury Series of novels about World War III. Volume IV is just coming out.

Thanks for the post of Card's views on this. Very thought provoking and compelling.

44 posted on 11/11/2003 8:57:20 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
And Freepers would just love his book about humans who were shipped to another planet after Earth was destroyed (by humans) that featuresd a AI satalite that used mind control to keep warlike technologies from being invented. Oh, and the 'city of women', where only women could own property and marrages were 1 year contracts, renewable or not at her whim. Ender's Game was thought provoking IMO.
45 posted on 11/11/2003 9:03:26 PM PST by Unassuaged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

bookmark
46 posted on 11/11/2003 11:25:18 PM PST by GeorgiaYankee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
Yes, I think he is like Senator Zen Miller: the party moved too far left for them, but for some reasons they are not ready to switch.
47 posted on 11/12/2003 5:37:21 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Unassuaged
I read all 7 books of his Ender's universe, but nothing else. What are the books you mentioned?
48 posted on 11/12/2003 5:40:01 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Yes, China somehow manages to stay in shadow despite their size and ambitions. For how long? We have enough trouble as it is.
49 posted on 11/12/2003 5:47:28 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Homecoming Earth: Earthfall -- Earthborn
50 posted on 11/15/2003 8:09:35 PM PST by Unassuaged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson