Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

ceu.su

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

#21

Post by aziaziazi »

madspindel wrote: post #18
aziaziazi wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One may note that the idea of violent resistance to oppression is deeply present in USA too : Right of Revolution and Second Amendment . It seems you are trying to show the peacefulness of the Christian Bible vs the Quran, but cherry-picking creates a selection bias. If one wants to find verses justifying violence, the New Testament has them too (let alone the old one) > Matthew 10:34: "Think not that I am come to se…

> If one wants to find verses justifying violence, the New Testament has them too You are saying verses that do justifying violence but the ones you provided are just having the word 'sword' in them. Are you really saying that they tell me as a Christian to do violence?

I'm basically saying cherry-picking creates a selection bias, which invalidated the point trying to be made. However that's a powerful technique to strengthen the idea of those already convinced.

Regarding the verse I'm not sure if they imply you should do the same at home, however it's a possible interpretation.

Re: Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

#22

Post by xorcist »

text0404 wrote: post #15
thomassmith65 wrote: post #11

Bin Laden: Separation of church and state, jews, homosexuals, gender equality, and America are bad. Every failure and every war in the arab world is because of the West. Therefore my terrorism is all your fault. Internet: He really makes some astute points.

I don't agree with bin Laden or his methods, but that's not in this letter. In the first section of the letter, "Why are we fighting and opposing you?", he describes atrocities committed by the United States and its allies. I think that part is what people reference as "astute points." You don't have to love a person to understand or consider their ideas. Ted Kaczynski is a good example of an American intellectual wi…

> many philosophically worthy ideas,

Would you mind spelling them out? Because all I find hovers between old fashioned reactionism and bat shit craziness. What is the philosophical value in that?

Re: Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

#23

Post by xorcist »

krapp wrote: post #14
thomassmith65 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would normally also roll my eyes at "They hate us for our freedoms" , but a couple passages of this letter reasonably could be paraphrased as "We hate you for your freedoms" . The paragraph beginning with "the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind" is a good example.

Apart from the references to Allah, that paragraph and the ones that follow are practically indistinguishable from the beliefs of many evangelical and conservative Christians, that America is an evil and secular empire corrupted by sin and vice that has turned away from God and His holy book. It just disagrees about which holy book. And that aside, many of the criticisms of the US made there are valid. The United Sta…

Similarities between extremely conservative Christianism and extremely conservative Islamism? I am shocked!

Seriously, has anyone ever argued that evangelicals and islamists would disagree about conservative ideas such as the role of sexuality or feminism in society? That sounds like a straw man among straw men.

Re: Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

#24

Post by sidhsjsjhz »

xorcist wrote: post #22
text0404 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with bin Laden or his methods, but that's not in this letter. In the first section of the letter, "Why are we fighting and opposing you?", he describes atrocities committed by the United States and its allies. I think that part is what people reference as "astute points." You don't have to love a person to understand or consider their ideas. Ted Kaczynski is a good example of an American intellectual wi…

> many philosophically worthy ideas, Would you mind spelling them out? Because all I find hovers between old fashioned reactionism and bat shit craziness. What is the philosophical value in that?

Parent poster probably should have mentioned Ellul, who the unabomber was heavily influenced by. Makes it easier for people who simply pattern match based on culturally enforced taboos instead of reading the source material and drawing their own conclusions.

Re: Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

#25

Post by text0404 »

xorcist wrote: post #22
text0404 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with bin Laden or his methods, but that's not in this letter. In the first section of the letter, "Why are we fighting and opposing you?", he describes atrocities committed by the United States and its allies. I think that part is what people reference as "astute points." You don't have to love a person to understand or consider their ideas. Ted Kaczynski is a good example of an American intellectual wi…

> many philosophically worthy ideas, Would you mind spelling them out? Because all I find hovers between old fashioned reactionism and bat shit craziness. What is the philosophical value in that?

To begin, I'm most interested in his argument that technology can become autonomous to the point that human beings can no longer control it and will become reliant on it, undermining human agency. AI will accelerate this issue and will be used by elites to subjugate lower classes.

From the Wikipedia page for Industrial Society and Its Future:

> [He argues] that the Industrial Revolution began a harmful process of natural destruction brought about by technology. Furthermore it states that forcing humans to adapt to machinery creates a sociopolitical order that suppresses human potential and freedom. [...] The manifesto states that the public largely accepts individual technological advancements as purely positive without accounting for their overall effect, including the erosion of local and individual freedom and autonomy.

This leads to some interesting questions. Do human beings still have autonomy if we allow our decisionmaking to be offloaded to machines? Is technological progress for the sake of progress a good thing? Does it serve humanity? If it does serve humanity, who does it serve and at what cost? What does our society become when human beings no longer have purpose?

Independently, Bill Joy quoted Kaczynski in a Wired article in 2000, arguing that unregulated technology can lead us down a dystopian path: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_the_Future_Doesn%27t_Need_...

Re: Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

#26

Post by krapp »

xorcist wrote: post #23
krapp wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from the references to Allah, that paragraph and the ones that follow are practically indistinguishable from the beliefs of many evangelical and conservative Christians, that America is an evil and secular empire corrupted by sin and vice that has turned away from God and His holy book. It just disagrees about which holy book. And that aside, many of the criticisms of the US made there are valid. The United Sta…

Similarities between extremely conservative Christianism and extremely conservative Islamism? I am shocked! Seriously, has anyone ever argued that evangelicals and islamists would disagree about conservative ideas such as the role of sexuality or feminism in society? That sounds like a straw man among straw men.

Did you have a salient point to make or was this just some weird reflex on your part?

Re: Bin Laden's "Letter to America" (2002)

#29

Post by text0404 »

karmakurtisaani wrote: post #19
text0404 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with bin Laden or his methods, but that's not in this letter. In the first section of the letter, "Why are we fighting and opposing you?", he describes atrocities committed by the United States and its allies. I think that part is what people reference as "astute points." You don't have to love a person to understand or consider their ideas. Ted Kaczynski is a good example of an American intellectual wi…

> Ted Kaczynski is a good example of an American intellectual with many philosophically worthy ideas I read a bit of his manifesto once. You have to be very generously looking for the worthy ideas.

Here's the Wikipedia page, it's a good summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Society_and_Its_Fut...

It's relevant today more than ever:

> [It argues] that the Industrial Revolution began a harmful process of natural destruction brought about by technology. Furthermore it states that forcing humans to adapt to machinery creates a sociopolitical order that suppresses human potential and freedom. [...] The manifesto states that the public largely accepts individual technological advancements as purely positive without accounting for their overall effect, including the erosion of local and individual freedom and autonomy.

Post reply on HN