New Zealand evil attack and the Internet
An opinion echo editorial published in the Chicago Tribune and re-printed in the Stanford Advocate, a Connecticut newspaper.
New Zealand, from an American perspective, may seem to be at the end of the Earth (MaineWriter - yes, New Zealand is half way around the planet from the US east coast!). Yet, that perceived isolation doesn’t equal protection from evil.
Evil can come from anywhere and descend on anyone.
Tragically, the internet can speed messages of hate.
On Friday, March 15, one gunman, who was fueled by hate, attacked two mosques in Christchurch on New Zealand’s South Island, killing several dozen people and wounding dozens more.
On Friday, March 15, one gunman, who was fueled by hate, attacked two mosques in Christchurch on New Zealand’s South Island, killing several dozen people and wounding dozens more.
He carried out the carnage on an afternoon day of prayer for Muslims. His purposeful massacre was livestreamed on Facebook. This was a heinous act of violence designed to be seen and shared. A shooter, apparently using a helmet camera, led viewers on his rampage.
The design of the crime is all too recognizable.
It is Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where a gunman killed 11 people in a synagogue.
It is a South Texas church, where a murderer killed 26 people.
It is a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., where the death toll was six.
It is terrorism carried out against a targeted group of victims at their most peaceful and thus vulnerable: people at prayer. One can speculate about a possible motive — in this case, white nationalist rage — but logic fails to justify such twisted acts.
New Zealand, like the United States, is a multicultural nation where Muslims are assimilated contributors to society. But like other groups, including Jewish people, Muslims are a highly visible minority, owing to their cultural identity and pattern of worship.
One sickening aspect of this crime that gained immediate attention was the bizarre livestream.
Early evidence suggested the internet also played a role in fomenting the gunman’s hateful ideology. The dark corners of cyberspace are full of such lunacy.
All kinds of ideas, good and evil, go viral through social media. Societies can’t outlaw hate. Government cannot regulate thought or ban words. In the United States, the First Amendment doesn’t take sides. Short of explicit threats, free speech must be free, which limits the ability of lawmakers to prevent eruptions of hate like the one in New Zealand.
But that doesn’t mean civilized societies are powerless. Gatekeepers such as Facebook and other social media purveyors do have a responsibility to patrol and regulate their own venues. And all of us have a responsibility to eradicate racial supremacy and other vile forms of bigotry.
Two messages come at us from faraway New Zealand. The first is the need to call out the hatred of the mass “them,” no matter who “they” may be. The second is to teach tolerance and embrace the differences that make people of all backgrounds unique and equal.
If all of us listen, those messages have a chance of squelching these senseless acts.
This editorial is from the Chicago Tribune.
The design of the crime is all too recognizable.
It is Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where a gunman killed 11 people in a synagogue.
It is a South Texas church, where a murderer killed 26 people.
It is a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., where the death toll was six.
It is terrorism carried out against a targeted group of victims at their most peaceful and thus vulnerable: people at prayer. One can speculate about a possible motive — in this case, white nationalist rage — but logic fails to justify such twisted acts.
New Zealand, like the United States, is a multicultural nation where Muslims are assimilated contributors to society. But like other groups, including Jewish people, Muslims are a highly visible minority, owing to their cultural identity and pattern of worship.
One sickening aspect of this crime that gained immediate attention was the bizarre livestream.
Early evidence suggested the internet also played a role in fomenting the gunman’s hateful ideology. The dark corners of cyberspace are full of such lunacy.
All kinds of ideas, good and evil, go viral through social media. Societies can’t outlaw hate. Government cannot regulate thought or ban words. In the United States, the First Amendment doesn’t take sides. Short of explicit threats, free speech must be free, which limits the ability of lawmakers to prevent eruptions of hate like the one in New Zealand.
But that doesn’t mean civilized societies are powerless. Gatekeepers such as Facebook and other social media purveyors do have a responsibility to patrol and regulate their own venues. And all of us have a responsibility to eradicate racial supremacy and other vile forms of bigotry.
Two messages come at us from faraway New Zealand. The first is the need to call out the hatred of the mass “them,” no matter who “they” may be. The second is to teach tolerance and embrace the differences that make people of all backgrounds unique and equal.
If all of us listen, those messages have a chance of squelching these senseless acts.
This editorial is from the Chicago Tribune.
Labels: Chicago Tribune, Muslims, Stanford Advocate
posted by Juliana L'Heureux | 10:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home