I knew - KNEW - the guilt trolls would show up before long.

[GaYellowDawg]

Already seen it. You know guilt trolls. Whenever you're feeling sad or upset about something, they're there to remind you that someone somewhere has it worse, so you should feel guilty about your feelings. If you've lost a foot, they'll tell you someone's lost two. If you are paralyzed from the waist down, they'll tell you about a quadriplegic. If you've lost a pet, they'll tell you about someone who's lost a parent. If you've lost a parent, they'll tell you about someone who's lost two. You get the idea. If you send your meal back at a restaurant, they'll tell you how people in x country don't have meals to send back. If you've just lost your job, they'll tell you about someone who's been out of work for a year. Lost a child? They know someone who's lost two. Do you have cancer? They know someone who has 3 different types. Had the flu? They know someone who died of a worse variant. Had a wreck? Well, you're lucky you weren't decapitated like this other person.

And if you're horrified at the bombing in Boston, well, they'll tell you that the same kind of carnage is happening in Pakistan. Yes, it's the truth. No matter what happens to you, it's a sad truth that someone somewhere has it worse. But you know what this person is doing to you when they remind you of that someone worse? When they try to make you guilty for your pain, or your grief, or your sorrow? They are telling you that you basically don't have a right to feel the way that you do. They are devaluing your emotion. It is a terrible thing to do.

Yes, carnage is happening in Pakistan. It's happening with drones that have our country's name on it, from our country's military. The idea that the majority of people on DU support it is ludicrous, and offensive. The idea that we went into the voting booth with drone slaughter in mind is ludicrous, and offensive. The idea we support the killing of innocents, especially children, is ludicrous, and offensive. You need not remind this board of the horror or the carnage half a world away.

And it has nothing - nothing - to do with how we should feel about the bombing in Boston. If you want to feel sad, or angry, or upset about this bombing, you have every right to do so. Another country's pain does not cancel your country's pain out. Another person's pain does not cancel your own out. Tragedy over there does not cancel tragedy over here out. You have a right to your grief, and horror, and pain about Boston, and no one has any right to tell you otherwise.

And to those of you who have already guilt-trolled: I know you don't have the decency to stop devaluing others' feelings, but couldn't you have at least waited until the bodies cooled? Even a troll should know when to stay under the bridge.

[defacto7]

1. Good rant. I agree.

[kardonb]

75. good rant

coud not agree more ! Bombings in Iraq are Iraqis bpmbing Iraqis . NOT our doing . Just the usual bloody mindedness of those folks . They will always find a reason to kill each other without any outside help .

[SammyWinstonJack]

82. ...

[vduhr]

94. You totally missed the point.

...and not only did you just devalued the OP's and everyone's feelings about this tragedy, you devalued the tragedy itself, and all of its victims. The point is that there is always something worse, but every tragedy is bad, no matter what, and each and every one is deserving of empathy and sympathy toward those involved.

[cartach]

109. What they really mean is that Middle Eastern lives

are worth much less than US lives and can be designated as collateral damage whenever a drone explodes and innocent lives are taken.

[icarusxat]

134. drones don't usually explode

they launch missles that explode...

[MrSlayer]

2. Well said.

There always has to be at least one.

[cliffordu]

3. I see what you did here.

Well played.

[Hekate]

4. Excellent rant. Someone has to say it.

[Jamastiene]

5. A lot of DUers, the majority I believe, have the capacity to

feel horrified by what happened in Boston AND what happens in other countries. Being horrified by horrible things is not an either/or situation. Most of us can feel horrified by all of the violence. Guilt trippers need to learn that.

[delrem]

6. 911 led to Iraq, totally unconnected, and on to the present day.

Some people are arguing for some fucking restraint.

[PatrynXX]

7. So far all I get out of dad

is how supposedly we are acting like 9/11 never happened. If I remember right Bush ignored 9/11 and went off and faught Iraq, which had nothing to do with it and thus we lost control of both wars.. Hopefully whoever did this one we actually bother to go after the real people..

[Spitfire of ATJ]

20. Mention to him at the height of the time Bush was claiming we were in a fight for our way of life,..

...when terrorists were all around us and the Democrats couldn't keep us safe,...he had Congress hold hearings on steroid use in sports.

Imagine in the middle of WWII if FDR had told Congress to go after Babe Ruth for drinking.

[Cracklin Charlie]

58. There were lots of fake trials during the Bush years.

All highly publicized. Martha Stewart, Michael Jackson, baseball players...I can't even remember them all.

I am certain that a psychologist could tell us why this tactic was used.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

65. Members of Congress often are former attorneys....

Which makes sense considering a background in law is nice to have for a lawmaker.

On the Democratic side they often were former defense council or what DC calls "Trial Lawyers" who sue big business. They often promise to "fight for you" and some are seen as former ambulance chasers.

On the Republican side they often hail from the DA's office. Former "tough on crime" prosecutors bragging about their conviction records. These types love to use their position to play "judge".

[freshwest]

8. Agreed. Thanks for expressing it so well. Leaves many of us speechless, as intended.

'...They are telling you that you basically don't have a right to feel the way that you do. They are devaluing your emotion...'

they feel superior doing it. There is a need it satisfies that has nothing to do with politics, changing things or helping anyone. Some will hide behind victims to inflict spite on others and call it criticism. They have no boundaries.

[raccoon]

45. And they are dumbasses. I can't stand them doing their thing about things in one's personal life,

or on the macro level (Boston, etc.) either. Recd.

[freshwest]

66. In the background of it is the assumption that the people in Boston 'deserved' this. Without any

thought that some of those in the race or the street may be the survivors of things abroad, or have fought such things. A desire for a collective punishment based on where one is at a place in time of people one does not know or care about, does not lend to the claim of compassion or a desire for peace, indeed, quite the opposite. It's the exact same energy.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

9. What gets me are the ones you meet in total TERROR,...

...who act like you don't take things seriously if you are not equally terrified.

Missing the whole point that it's people like them that are the target audience and thus, encourage terrorists.

[freshwest]

62. +1

[valerief]

73. +1

[Demo_Chris]

10. Nice rant. Nonsense, but a nice rant none the less

Unless you are in some way personally affected by this -- you were there, you know a victim, whatever -- then you have absolutely no reason to care MORE about this attack than any of the dozens or hundreds of drone attacks in the middle east. And if anything, the later should leave you MORE appalled, as it is being done in our name by leaders we elected.

If this attack has made someone realize that explosions out of nowhere turning people into bleeding screaming hamburger is not exactly cool, then good. There are tens of thousand of people across the middle east who feel exactly the same way. They are equally innocent, the bombs we fire at them are bigger, and their children and families are just as demolished.

If some are using this attack as an opportunity to say "We have to stop this shit" it is hardly fair to criticize them. They care about ALL the victims -- from Boston to Baghdad -- others only care about some.

[DonCoquixote]

18. Good?

"
If this attack has made someone realize that explosions out of nowhere turning people into bleeding screaming hamburger is not exactly cool, then good."

No, ity is not good. It is one thing to use this to highlight other issues, another to dismiss what happened as Good.

[Demo_Chris]

38. Reread the sentence you are criticizing. nt

[leftynyc]

36. Wallowing in self righteousness

is an extremely unattractive thing to watch.

[AngryOldDem]

39. Get off your high horse.

There is nothing "good" about people being turned into hamburger, no matter where it happens.

And I don't need the victims in Boston to be turned into some kind of sanctimonious object lesson. I guess you know for a fact that those who are upset and grieving over Boston here don't also care about the innocent victims in the Mideast? You know this, how?

[whatchamacallit]

49. He's not saying the horrifying event is good

he's saying if some awareness and understanding of our own senseless violence comes from it, then good.

[Dorian Gray]

46. That's untrue

People care more about things that happen closer to them. This attack also instills fear in many people that we are never safe, anywhere. That is freaky and saddening. Furthermore, most of us know people in Boston. I went to college there. It's been years since I've lived there. I do know people who live there and work there. I love the city. I'm sorry that they had to live through this. It's horrible.

I'm also a NYer and lived on 29th and Madison during the 9-11 attack. Many NYers, even if they don't personally know people in Boston, feel saddened about this. They empathize deeply and know how helpless the people of Boston are feeling.

Plus, an 8 year old child died. That's tragic.

People lost their limbs. Of course we care about people we don't know. As careless as it sounds, we saw images of this yesterday.

[reACTIONary]

130. +1! (nt)

[yodermon]

53. "then good"???? Leveraging TERROR to gain support for some OPINION is called....

TERRORISM.

You are a terrorist by proxy with that fucking rhetoric.

[DonCoquixote]

100. thank you

for doing a better job of expressing my reply than I did, kudos. People will remember who acted like vultures. And if the person says "well, that's not what I MEANT (snark tone)" then said person better take a few composition courses before they not only make fools of themselves, but wind up doing harm.

[Cha]

126. thank you, yodermon. "fucking rhetoric" indeed. n/m

[hamsterjill]

80. I am an American. So I AM personally affected by this.

I care about ALL of the victims - from Boston to Baghdad. But this is a terror attack that was perpetrated on my homeland, it is my fellow Americans that were hurt.

So pardon me if I elect to have them (my fellow countrymen) foremost in my thoughts at this time.

[daybranch]

132. Good answer

Jesus said what you do to the least among us, then you do to me. I do not remember him establishing any religious or geographical boundaries for that statement. Buddha taught that we are all connected. The sooner we start realizing the connections we can make things a lot better.

[Demo_Chris]

133. Thank you. nt

[LittleBlue]

11. I think they're telling you to be consistent, not that

you don't have a right to grief.

When a story like Boston gets 10000x more stories than 10 kids blown up in Pakistan, it looks a bit... er... racist. Like you value the life of a Bostonian at many times the life of a poor brown kid.

Sorry, no sympathy here for you feeling wronged. I've seen too many defend drones on this forum. If you're guilty, then maybe you should examine your beliefs as to why you feel guilty rather than lash out at others for pointing out this inconsistency.

[boilerbabe]

13. I agree with you. good post. nt

[cynatnite]

15. Boston is a little closer to home than Pakistan...

I think that is more likely why you will see far more about what happened in Boston today.

It's not a matter of one feeling guilty...it's the attempt to make one feel guilty because they have the audacity to express their horror at what happened today. There is no sense in trivializing someone's feelings about what happened because you don't think they've expressed enough outrage in your opinion at another awful horror that was experienced on the other side of the world.

[LittleBlue]

17. But there is sense in challenging them

when they go into the next drone thread and express support for a program that is notorious for turning children into charred corpses.

Yeah sorry, not buying it. It's a call for consistency, not an attempt to make you stop being compassionate. Some DUers want you to feel sadness and shame at the kids we murder, not just Americans. The double-standard is so blatantly obvious.


Here is the ultimate test: Does it bother you? Because it shouldn't if you have nothing to be ashamed of. The OP seems bothered. Try examining why.

[cynatnite]

24. It's the presumption that because someone expresses horror at something awful...

then they somehow aren't horrified at another. That's what I'm saying here.

It's entirely possible to feel the same outrage, horror and empathy at two separate acts of horror. If anything, it comes across as an attempt to trivialize one horror in favor of another.

I just find this kind of back and forth tacky, insensitive, and pointless.

No one wants the innocent to die and when they do, most normal people are affected by it.

It's like this:

Person A: Wow, that's awful.

Person B: Then why don't you think it's awful when it happens in another country?

Person A: Yes, it is awful, too.

Person B: Why didn't you say that when it happened? What's wrong with you?

****

You want people to feel horror and/or outrage on your terms. If they don't, you want to make them feel guilty. Of course, it's a huge fail on your part.

I've learned not to presume what a person feels or doesn't feel on a forum such as this. It can be a cold an impersonal space that doesn't give a true picture of a person.

I'd rather take the road that most normal people feel just as much compassion and empathy as me. I do believe that.

[LittleBlue]

26. I don't

I'd rather take the road that most normal people feel just as much compassion and empathy as me. I do believe that.

I've seen a completely different America from you, then. Because when we kill innocents overseas, they barely get a mention or any outpouring of sympathy like when Americans are killed. Especially when we are the murderers.

Feel however you want, no one can stop you. Just don't come to a political forum expecting to not be challenged about your feelings. If that's what you want, the internet is the wrong place.

[cynatnite]

32. You have no idea of what I have or haven't seen of America...

You know nothing about me other than what I choose to tell you. You are making an assumption based on nothing more than what I don't say.

If a person chooses to challenge me about my feelings...that is their choice. It's my choice at how I choose to express my feelings.

Just because I don't share all of my feelings doesn't mean you have the necessary insight to pass judgment on them.

Rather than assume what my feelings are, ask and perhaps I will opt to share them. That is the only way you will ever have a true picture of what they are.

[Marrah_G]

57. For the next couple days I am worried about the people ten miles from me

I won't apologize for that.

[ChaoticTrilby]

139. +1 Thank you.

I was about to post an angry, screaming, rant at the Guilty-Tripping Trolls in this thread for basically making stupid assumptions that, if someone mourns the tragedy in Boston, it means that they aren't also grieving for those in the Middle-East. You put it in a much more coherent form than I could have.

There is misery all over the world. Anyone who expects me to expound upon ALL of it, with every breath and post, is utterly ridiculous and insensitive.

[Dorian Gray]

47. How the heck do you know

that people who are saddened by this aren't horrified by drone attacks and the like. There are loads of threads from people who hate the drone attacks. Always. Who are you to presume?

[vduhr]

98. Exactly.

That's the point of the OP that many here seem to have missed, and thus have proven the OP's point.

[pnwmom]

19. It's not racist that people are upset about Boston. This hits closer to home

because it IS closer to home. And many of us know people who were directly impacted.

We would all be overwhelmed if all the troubles of the entire world were on our minds all the time.

[LittleBlue]

27. And that would be fine if those Pakistani kids weren't killed by our drones

If they succumbed to natural disaster or malaria, you would be right. But you can't send drones to the other side of the planet and then claim it's too far from home to compare with Boston. The drone tragedies don't originate in Pakistan, they originate 400 miles southwest of Boston in Washington DC. That's close to home.

If you feel that my assertion is ridiculous, you shouldn't feel guilty about your grief in any way.

[Demo_Chris]

41. Very well said! nt

[treestar]

43. We are at least in theory defending ourselves from terrorism

And we are aiming at certain people. Would you have us do nothing about terrorism? I think you are probably gleeful that the drone killed children accidentally. So you can use that to go on about how awful we are.

[Ash_F]

116. And Pakistani Pashtuns are in theory fighting for their freedom

Oh wait you have no idea what I am talking about like most Americans who are ignorant of the politics of Pakistan, but for some reason think it is ok to violently support one side.

[treestar]

119. Why does that mean we can do nothing to defend ourselves from terrorism?

I could know tons about that, but we were the ones attacked on 911 by Al Qaeda, and that is why we are there in the first place.

So what if you know all about the politics of Pakistan? That makes you special somehow? You are boasting, not making an argument.

[Ash_F]

120. Ignorance is bliss right?

It matters because it makes your entire post, and the previous one, wrong both logically and factually. But whatever, remain clueless at your own free will. This thread isn't really about Pakistan.

[snagglepuss]

81. If you are going to bring up drones in Pakistan why not mention Sunni suicide

bombers blowing up nonSunni Pakistanis? It's be interesting knowing whether drones or Islamist freaks have maimed and slaughtered more kids in Pakistan.

[cartach]

101. Doesn't matter how many are killed?

How can you justify US drone killing by even suggesting that "Islamist freaks" have maimed and slaughtered more kids in Pakistan? Do you also suggest that if they have then the US should play catch up and drones should kill even more kids until the score is approximately even.

[snagglepuss]

103. Excuse me but where I have justified the use of drones?

[dreamnightwind]

28. Yes, but WE are killing the people with drones

whereas we have no direct responsibility for the Boston attack.

I get the closer to home thing, though I find it unfortunate, we should value and respect all human life equally to whatever extent that is possible.

But there's a much larger issue of complicity. No Government official elected with my vote bombed that marathon. Can't say that about Pakistan, our names are on each of those deaths, and you can find similar deaths we are culpable for in nearly every corner of the globe.

So it would be appropriate to use the close-to-home awareness of the horror of such violence, as a reference point to those same feelings that we are inflicting on countless innocents in places where we don't necessarily have the emotional connection to the victims.

[GaYellowDawg]

67. Speak for yourself.

I have no direct responsibility for drones. None. I have never piloted a drone. I have never ordered an attack. I have never been a part of the decision tree on any level, from the President down to the controller. I have never built a drone, or repaired a drone, or programmed a drone, or armed a drone. I have never participated in drone attacks; therefore, I have no direct responsibility for drones. You could make the argument that I have indirect responsibility for drones, but you have no place spreading the LIE that I or any of this board bears direct responsibility, unless you know specific DU posters who are part of the aforementioned decision tree.

And I don't think you have a good argument for indirect responsibility. We had four choices, the last election:

1. Vote for a President who uses drones.
2. Vote for an incredibly shallow, rich man who would have used drones.
3. Vote for a third party candidate who had zero chance to use or not use drones.
3. Don't vote.

Sometimes, in life, there is no such thing as a good choice. There's only the choice between bad choices, and if you're backed into that corner, you can't really be held responsible as if you had a good choice. If there were a major party candidate who made the cessation of drone attacks a campaign plank/promise, then I would bear indirect responsibility for the attacks if I didn't vote for that candidate. I did not, however, have that choice.

I voted for the President in order to keep Mitt Romney out of the White House. I had a choice between two candidates whom I viewed as Republican Lite, and Republican Fanatic. I have no reason to believe that Romney would have stopped the drone attacks. I have no more control over our government's use of drones than I do any government's policy. The cold, hard reality of being a United States citizen is that we have little awareness of our our government's policies, less control of them, and our politicians have no accountability for them. The best we were able to hope for with the last Presidential election was to try to elect the one who would do the least damage to us while ignoring our opinions. That does not translate to an endorsement of, or responsibility for, drone attacks.

[riqster]

69. +1

[dreamnightwind]

78. Sorry, that's how it works

In the minds of the rest of the world, citizens of a democratic government are viewed as being responsible for the actions of their leaders. Sure they understand that we don't literally approve of everything our leaders do, but by and large, with a policy so well understood and widespread as the escalating remote control killings of their family members, we are viewed as responsible, and rightly so. That's what the whole "not in my name" peace movement was about way back when. If we don't like it, we're supposed to push back on our leadership until either the policy changes or the leaders are replaced.

I have no quarrel with your vote for Obama, I realize that your choices were limited, they always are. But these actions are indeed done in our name, and if you don't like that, you and all the rest of us need to very loudly let our leaders know about it.

As for your arguments, you need to make them to the Pakistanis, the people in Yemen, Afghanistan, and everywhere that innocent civilians are being killed by our government, not to me. I am completely on your side in this regard. Some of them might buy your arguments, many of them will point to the empty beds of their deceased loved ones and tell you to go to hell, or even try to send you there. And that's how we are looked at today in the eyes of many around the world. It is for that reason, if not for better ones, that we cannot tolerate these policies by our government.

[Progressive dog]

87. So they get to lump us all together and kill random people

because they ignorantly believe that we are all responsible, since we live in a democracy.
To prevent these terrorist attacks, we should see continued Pakistani support of the Taliban and Al Quaeda as having nothing to do with the Pakistani supporters, but see the parade watchers in Boston as fair targets because of drone attacks in Pakistan.

Sounds like a solution to me.

[dreamnightwind]

95. Sounds like a mischaracterization to me

Yes, we are held accountable, to some degree, for the actions of our government, and we should be. They "get to" kill random Americans? Of course not. Some of them will do that, because they don't know of any other way to address the injustices done to their own people. Doesn't mean I think it's justified. And I certainly don't view marathon watchers in Boston as fair targets, but you knew that. And besides, who are "they"? The Boston attack was probably domestic terrorism, we'll have to wait and see.

If we're not accountable for the actions of our elected reps, who is? I don't WANT to be accountable for them. But there is a lot of willful ignorance about our government's policies, or even approval. Some of it is because people are just busy, or shallow, or lied to. Some of it, though, is because we benefit from those actions in some way and are afraid to exist straight up in the world without the force of our military to rearrange things to our liking. Access to resources. Monetary policy. Global control. Overthrowing foreign leaders. For that we should be accountable, and trust me, we are.

But my original point was that the Boston attack was probably the act of a random maniac, whereas the drone killings are the actions of our elected reps, and as such need to be actively opposed and stopped, because they are our reps and these actions are being done in our name. And we should feel for those victims, the innocent ones, and none of those people have been convicted of anything. Watch the wikileaks video, they were just killing whatever was moving.

[Progressive dog]

97. If you repeat what you said, I didn't mischaracterize it

I must have missed the part about the random maniac.

[dreamnightwind]

112. ??? that makes no sense

If I repeat what YOU said then you weren't mischaracterizing it. I didn't, and you did.

[Progressive dog]

115. You said "If we're not accountable for the actions of our elected reps, who is?"

I didn't realize that all of our elected reps got to pick drone targets. I'm just trying to understand your defense of the Boston terrorists.

[dreamnightwind]

117. WTF?

I made no such defense. And I have better things to do. Goodbye.

[Progressive dog]

118. You said "I made no such defense." so must be someone else using your name nt

[pennylane100]

33. I thing you are ignoring a big difference between what happened in Boston and Pakistan.

Those eleven dead little babies laid out waiting to be buried were killed by American troops, using American bombs. It is beyond outrageous to think that we cannot care about other victims of acts of terror, while worrying about our own, especially when we were solely responsible for all their deaths.

Like it or not, we caused the same kind of chaos, destruction and a lot more deaths than what happened in Boston today when we unleashed our drones on a group of innocent children and I feel certain that I am not alone in mourning for them along with the victims of Boston.

We do not know who is responsible for what happened in Boston today, but I feel hopeful that we will find out and in the meantime we will give all our support and help to the people that need it, sadly we do not seem to be willing to do the same to the victims of our acts of terror.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

122. [phone]

[joshcryer]

23. I think they should look in the mirror, if that's the case.

I see the guilt folks all the time, but they don't spend much time at all disavowing the drone wars. In fact, I'd argue that generally the only time that they themselves show significant concern for the drone war is when an event like this happens here or elsewhere in the developed world.

As far as drone war supporters here, I can count three that I know of, and only one of those three used a devils advocate argument and I don't think they actually support it (it was a thought experiment).

[pipi_k]

83. It has nothing to do

with racism.

It has to do with the fact that unless people can actually see the victims...their faces...it's very hard to conceptualize the loss.

So I would imagine that if the names and faces of those ten kids blown up in Pakistan were shown on the news, there might be just as much outrage over their deaths as there would be for the deaths of ten anonymous persons here in the US.

Also...This attack happened here in the US. Bombings of this type are not usual here. It happened in MY state...Massachusetts. In a city I've visited many times. I felt like I had been personally violated.


There are lots more reasons than "racism" for people's inability to be outraged over tragedies that happen in other places.

[Lizzie Poppet]

105. Being "consistent" doesn't require also mentioning every similar incident.

A person should be able to discuss something without some twit taking them to task for "failing" to mention something else. Fuck that.

[Wind Dancer]

12. Beautifully stated!

I know so many people in real life that react the same way. It's hard to handle, at times.

K & R

[BainsBane]

14. It's invalidation

And always makes people feel bad. Someone always has it worse. That doesn't mean your pain doesn't matter. Validating the feelings of others is important. It shows that people care. I don't expect it online because you see anything and everything. Offline, however, I want friends and family members to validate my feelings, and I try to make sure I always validate their feelings.

As for the victims in Boston, being killed or injured there is no less devastating than in Afghanistan.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

22. If a woman walks into a room full of women and says, "I just had a car accident"...

They will all react with, "Are you okay?"

If a guy walks into a room full of guys and says, "I just had a car accident"...

At least one asshole will say, "Ah, that's nothin', when I had MY accident..."

[BainsBane]

25. Perhaps

But there are many women who discount others's feelings as well.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

29. Let's not talk about Babs Bush....

I'm headed for bed and it'll give me nightmares.

[redqueen]

61. This. nt

[sheshe2]

16. Kick and Rec!

[Ash_F]

21. The OP is perhaps attacking a strawman?

I can't speak for the 'guilt trolls', but you are presenting them as having some dastardly motivations. I highly doubt that they consider their objectives to be as you have described.

[AngryOldDem]

37. Maybe not "dastardly motivations"...

....but the OP is pretty much spot-on about how the guilt-trippers always seem to come out to marginalize other people's emotions about tragic events. As if a drone strike in Pakistan cancels out, as the OP said, our horror about Boston.

The sanctimony and scolding get old after awhile, not to mention insulting and ridiculous.

[Ash_F]

92. "Cancels out" <-- That's what I mean

I don't think people intend to make that point; that being the strawman. Another poster in this thread said it was more a call for consistency. I think it can also be a call for empathy.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

123. Others may not understand you, Ash.

But I do.

[LarryNM]

30. Its the Queen for a Day Mentality

In the end only one contestant is eligible to be recognized as deserving and win the goodies. Of course in the real world no one ever wins, the evil continues and the 99% are told to suck it up, pull up the boot-straps, stop feeling sorry for yourself and blah, blah, blah.

[Raine]

31. Agree and THANKS for posting this. nt

[etherealtruth]

34. Excellent, K&R, thank you

[leftynyc]

35. Excellent rant

Don't let anyone make you feel you don't deserve what you're feeling. It's a truly uncaring and spiteful thing to do - let them wallow in their righteousness like it makes them a better person - it doesn't. My thoughts and prayers are with Boston - I know what that city is going through right now.

[OwnedByCats]

40. If I or others expressed sadness or anger over

every horrible thing in the world when something new happens, I'd be talking for a very very long time and frankly I don't have time to rattle off all the things that bother me all at once. I don't condone violence no matter where it happens and to assume I or anyone else does not care about other things just because we're talking about a specific event is a very extreme assumption.

Now my mother is one of these people who thinks talking about problems should be some sort of contest on who has the worst problems. I tell her something, I immediately get some sort of response about how her life is worse. I love my mom dearly, but this drives me NUTS. I want some motherly advice and support and the conversation always ends up being about her. I listen to her problems without injecting my own into the discussion but she's not capable of the same.

However, even though this is a little different - I've been guilty of comparative statements too. Sometimes I do it to be funny - such as my husband finding an ant in the house and he goes nuts and I say "well, it could be worse - could have been a cockroach". Other times I do it to help people gain some perspective. Like if an athiest or believer feels they are being persecuted I usually jump in with "hey, be thankful you don't live in the mother country of my ancestors (which happens to be Britain) back several hundred years ago when you could have been killed, and not very humanely I might add, just for not believing in the religion their monarchy thinks they should believe in". I know it may sound like I don't have sympathy for their plight but I think it's necessary to appreciate that things could be a lot worse and we should be at least thankful that we don't live in an extremely oppressive society of which our ancestors dealt with.

The point is if I or others express horror at bombings on US soil, that does not mean we agree with drones killing kids in the Middle East. It's all bad and I wish that those who do it would knock it off, and that includes what we're doing in the ME. Just stop already!

[ananda]

42. Right on!

..

[SidDithers]

44. Damn well said...

Wonder if they'll show up in this thread to tell how wrong they think you are.

Sid

[geek tragedy]

52. See above, they did so.

They just can't help shitting on other people who are upset because those people aren't as 'pure' in their politics.

[GaYellowDawg]

63. ... and see below.

[distantearlywarning]

48. Thank you. I hate those kind of posts.

[cpwm17]

50. One big strawman

Last edited Tue Apr 16, 2013, 10:03 AM - Edit history (1)

At least from what I've seen here.

When there are mass shootings, it is appropriate to talk about gun control. In fact it is the best time to talk about gun control. The gun nuts don't like it. They say you shouldn't politicize the tragedy. They're wrong.

It is in no way an insult to the victims of violence to promote a reduction of violence after these tragedies. There is no downside.

The time after a terrorist attack is a good time to talk about a reduction of terrorism, no matter who perpetrates the violence. As Americans, we have the most control over American violence.

From my perspective, much of the backlash comes from people that can't equate American victims of violence to foreign victims of violence. The inability to equate foreign lives to American lives is a major reason the US promotes so much violence on foreign soil. I'll leave it at that.

[Iggo]

64. Yep.

[GaYellowDawg]

68. Your response is a straw man.

I did not say that anyone could not promote a reduction of violence. What I said was that no one has any business minimizing grief or horror over one violent act because of another.

[cpwm17]

86. How does it minimize grief in any way

to promote less violence after such a tragedy?

It minimizes victims of US terrorism by condemning comparisons of US Government violence to violence conducted by stateless terrorists.

I'm saying that they are equivalent, since all human life has the same intrinsic value, and all murder is equally tragic. Your logic is backwards.

[LiberalLovinLug]

91. Your assumption that those that bring up Pakistan drones

..are "minimizing grief" in Boston.

That's your Straw Man.

You in fact are the one minimizing - the many more child deaths done in your name by drone attacks. By firing a shot over the bow...a warning that fellow DUers dare not use this incident for a quite natural thought process and go beyond our VERY REAL OUTRAGE at the Boston bombings. The difference is some of us don't stop there, wallowing in our hatred and anger at the "other". Some of us naturally are reminded of and feel empathy for those families wailing and holding their bloodied lifeless infants from a US (what feels like a terrorist) attack on them. We cannot ignore the hypocrisy of immersing ourselves in a kind of exclusive and cordoned-off grief, when we know full well that our government is guilty of much worse.

Some of us dare to question why?...why would any person or persons feel this kind of passion, misguided and wrong though it is, to carry out such a abomination? And that maybe, just maybe, if we balanced out the need for revenge and bloody retribution, with some serious soul searching about things like blowback from thoughtless and callous foreign policies, and reverse those, we may stop at least some of any future attacks. And just like the Newtown tragedy was the exact right time to talk about gun control, this is the right time to talk about our own complicity in causing the same kind of anguish x 1000 to other families.

So please do not infer that those that bring up Pakistan drone attacks on children overseas are ignoring innocent American victims. It is precisely those victims and potential ones in the future, that we not only care about, but by shining a light on the hypocrisy, are trying to prevent from being victims of terrorist attacks in another American city in the future.

[cpwm17]

96. +1,000,000

[Fantastic Anarchist]

125. Thank you for saying an inconvenient truth.

[CrawlingChaos]

93. +1000

[Fantastic Anarchist]

124. Well said.

[zeemike]

128. Well they look different and speak funny.

And wear funny close and stuff...with rags on their heads instead of hats...
Obviously they are not like us and so their kids are not worth what ours are...
Jingoism is a way of life for us...get over it.

There should be no need for a sarcasm tag here...

[Exultant Democracy]

51. Couldn't disagree more. No one gives a shit about Afganistan, but for a few weeks people

will care about civilians getting blown up. This is the only opportunity to speak about these issues when at least some will have had their hearts opened.

[Occulus]

85. "No one gives a shit about Afganistan"

Thank you for beautifully and concisely demonstrating the exact attitude the OP is condemning.

Guilt trolling, with an outright LIE as its premise.

Shame on you.

[Exultant Democracy]

102. I've talked to people who think it's already over. Perhaps you live in a liberal bubble

but in Apple pie America people just don't give a shit about brown people. Killing in Newton CT gets more then a month of coverage. There are more then a dozen major cities that have the equivalent of a Newton every year, year in and year out with little kids getting blown away. Guess when the kids in the inner cities started getting gun laws passed across the country that will help them? After some unfortunate middle class white children were horrifically murdered.

[Marrah_G]

54. This is my City

All those threads are going right in the trash-bucket today.

[Myrina]

55. Dislike.

Pouty & self-righteous. Bad form.

[Floyd_Gondolli]

56. Agreed.

[The Straight Story]

59. And yet after 9/11 many liberals were quick to bring up the impact of policies

when people started to ask 'why would someone do such a thing'

To which we explained that when you have no sympathy for other people and the things you do which lead to their deaths en masse and you don't spend more than a minute on it in a 24x7x265 news cycle - well sometimes that has an affect on people.

When we get attacked, we cheer on our military for revenge. And we shrug it off when innocents die.

When someone attacks us for attacking them we are like..who would do such a thing? What awful people.

Sometimes, we don't like to look in the mirror.

Both can be awful, both are, but we only care about the one.

[yurbud]

60. mentioning the other isn't meant to cancel out our pain, just use it as a chance to teach empathy

which is next to impossible most of the time.

[aandegoons]

70. Well one thing about this post.

It certainly explains how lack of empathy has invaded the democratic party and led us to where we are today. And that point is certainly to the extreme right of me. Especially when we choose to deride instead of trying to understand.

People in Iraq or Pakistan or Israel or anywhere else should hold equal value. The moment we value geography over life is the moment we justify evil in geography's name. If we cannot take this moment to understand that what we do as a country causes these same reactions in those that are harmed worldwide then we as a country are doomed to war forever.

Yes it hurts and it hurts those we hurt just as much as it hurts us.

[GaYellowDawg]

72. Straw man.

I never said that people in Iraq or Pakistan or Israel should not hold equal value. Never. I never said that the local was more important than the distant.

What I said was that the distant did not mitigate the local. I said that one pain does not mitigate the other, nor should it be used to criticize. I said that there are many people who seek to trivialize someone's pain because someone else is hurting worse. That trivialization is also lacking in empathy.

You should read more carefully.

[aandegoons]

76. Yet not one of those post you hate said any of that.

You should read more carefully.

Edit to add.

Not one post on this board is meant to trivialize except yours. Calling those who care for everyone trolls is meant to do exactly what you just said.

[just1voice]

113. Excellent point

I'm sure the logic and rational thinking is meaningless to the OP though.

[hedgehog]

71. No one mentioned that guilt trolls are implying that what happened in Boston

happened because of drones. How is that different from jumping to the conclusion that the bomber is Muslim?

[egduj]

74. Agreed.

WHERE people get blown to shreds should be the determining factor in how much grief and respect for the victims is appropriate.

[leftyohiolib]

77. i think you should have more repeated words in bold print. one just wasnt enuff

[Hissyspit]

79. Completely disagree. 'Distance tends to sanitize and desensitize'

Last edited Tue Apr 16, 2013, 02:38 PM - Edit history (2)

Plenty of obviously non-trolls have wanted to discuss.

I have listened my whole lifetime to 'now is not the time,' and then it is never the time.

Would you consider that a troll tactic?

11. Some very good photos

While this will seem perhaps inappropriate, I think it needs to be said....

As horrific and shocking as this attack was, an explosion out of nowhere vaporizing random innocents, this is essentially no different than what we are doing every week with our drone attacks. If it's horrific here, if it's unacceptable here, and it is both, then it is equally unacceptable when done in our name.

Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink
Response to Demo_Chris (Reply #11)Mon Apr 15, 2013, 06:32 PM
Sheepshank (4,885 posts)
14. yes, it's inapproprate.

my god, some people.
stay involved and evolved
Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink
Response to Sheepshank (Reply #14)Mon Apr 15, 2013, 06:40 PM
Demo_Chris (2,055 posts)
16. I disagree. Distance tends to sanitize and desensitize

Incidents like this are a reminder and a wake up call of what WE ARE DOING. If this is offensive, if you cannot handle the images, then perhaps it is time to reconsider what we are doing.

My heart goes out to the people of every city and town that are the victims of mass murder.
Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Some troll behavior from all sides is the price we pay for the open exchange for ideas.

[Sheepshank]

88. Completely agree with the fuckers that use the Boston tragedy

to promote theor own pet agendas. They could very easily start their own thread, but chose to try and hijack something else. It's pathetic.

[CrawlingChaos]

89. What a complete load of garbage!

The examples in your first paragraph are in NO WAY analogous to pointing out that Americans who are horrified by the carnage in Boston are desensitized to carnage wrought by our own military terrorism.

You say people here at DU don't support drone strikes, but MANY are indifferent to them, and it certainly could be argued that they passively support them. THIS MUST STOP.

Where is the appropriate response to this here on DU?

http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/WOR-TOP-meanwhile-in-afghanistan-30-wedding-guests-killed-by-errant-us-bombing-4237290-NOR.html

[just1voice]

111. +1

Well said.

[ReRe]

90. K&R

Restraint. R-E-S-T-R-A-I-N-T. Maybe that's what the "guilt trolls" lack? You know, restraint. When you want to scream "I-told-you-so" when someone does something foolish or at least very risky and gets hurt, but wisdom tells you the person needs support, not a verbal kick in the heart/soul/gut.

There's a time to scream or be sanctimonious and there's a time to keep your lip zipped. I have not been online for a few days (ReRe SickSick). But I will have to admit that what was going through the "guilt trolls" minds since yesterday had passed through my own mind, but never ever would I have logged in and slammed anyone who was suffering emotionally. EVER!

To you "guilt trolls": Did you never learn when you was a kid when to keep your mouths shut? Get a grip! This is one of those effing times, OK??? Don't holler "Freedom of Speech" either. This is not censorship. This is called human kindness. Restraint. Look it up!!!!

[Bake]

99. WhatI hate are the "we deserve it" posts "because our drones do it every day to other people."

I hate that shit.

Bake

[cartach]

104. How about "what goes around comes around" or

"you reap what you sow".

[Bake]

110. I'm not real keen on those either.

The son of a friend of mine was running in the Marathon. Fortunately, he's okay. But neither he nor the other marathoners did anything to deserve what happened.

So no, I'm not too keen on those.

Bake

[delrem]

137. Who says "we deserve it"?

Far as I can see some people are saying that this is horrible, undeserved, unwarranted, total terror, and they're also saying that maybe we should take a moment to compare our natural and legitimate feelings with those of people next to a wedding party, a funeral procession, a village center, hit by hellfire or cruise missile. These people too might be totally agonized, not knowing what the fuck they can do to stop it.
It's fact that people living under the 24/7 buzz of mostly unseen drones who only occasionally fire their load do suffer from PTSD. Their children are traumatized. These people are *the same* as us.

These feelings don't negate each other - they are *the same*.
This isn't a guilt trip, it's a reality check.

[marions ghost]

106. A lot of people in the world hate America--

--it's OK to bring that fact up in the face of this. It's not about guilt, it's about logic. It has a LOT to do with how we should feel about Boston if the bomber is a foreigner with an agenda.

We can feel grief and pain about the whole terrible situation, can't we?

[jimlup]

107. I grasp your point but disagree...

I think it is important for us to realize what other people are experiencing. We tend to downplay "yet another bombing in Pakistan" or "Blast kills 25 in Iraq" yet it is someone's sons and daughters who are experiencing these things and they are just like us. To recognize that is hard for many...

It isn't as trivial a point as you make it out to be.

[undergroundpanther]

108. moral yardsticks

when used by guilt trolls only devalue another's feelings with it,i wish they'd stfu.Everyone is aware this entire world is being ripped apart literally emotionally,it is full of pain,and all that pain is equal. But when someone hurts and says so,don't minimize their pain,that is what abusive people do to people they victimize.

I m sad for what happened in boston,and I hope all who feel compassion to the hurt and those who were hurt find a place of peace.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

114. Troll Thread Irony

[Coyotl]

121. False equivalencies can be such a beautiful argument and they work well,

especially if the audience lacks critical reasoning skills.

There are actual relationships between terror in the USA and the other side of the world. You can't dismiss that fact. Arguing that gullt troll are the problem is counter-productive.

[ms liberty]

127. + 1000000...some of us have empathy enough for every heartbreak. n/t

[Betsy Ross]

129. Nevermind

I thought this was about quilt trolls. Wanted to know what those were.

[pennylane100]

131. I certainly do not feel any guilt over the killing of innocent children in Pakistan.

I did not kill them, my government did. I cannot imagine how terrifying it must have been for those that were in Boston when the bombing happened. It is a memory that will stay with some of them forever. However, for you to suggest that this is not the time to remember all the innocent people that have had their lives forever changed by our bombs and our people, is cruel and insensitive.

While the whole country is wondering what kind of monsters caused the carnage in Boston and what was their motivation, the parents of the eleven little children killed in Pakistan already knew the answer. It was merely collateral damage. That nice little euphemism we use to cover up the fact that we have killed innocent people. What happened in Boston shocked the nation. Our president spoke about how hard we would work to find the perpetrators. How could we not think about all the other people that had lived through the same kind of terror. I think that for many people it was a jolt of reality to know that this was the kind of horror we brought into their lives.

I am sorry that you are unable to feel compassion for all victims of violence at the same time. However, that is your problem. I can and will grieve for all the victims of violence and yes I will feel ashamed that my government is one of the perpetrators, and I will try not to judge you if you do not agree with me.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

135. Bravo. n/t

[Iwillnevergiveup]

136. The real irony

when someone tries to one-up our pain or grief is that in the final analysis, that person feels empathy for no one.

[gtar100]

138. It's because a lot of conversations are people just expressing their associative thoughts

and they aren't really talking to you. You are merely providing a sounding board for them to justify their own talking. Everybody does it to some degree so don't take any of it personally. It's an unconscious action. But it can be difficult to listen to when you realize how insensitive and selfish it is.