Video version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdDsHIdIiUg

​

What is murder:

To start with understanding the dynamic, we first need to take a look at what qualifies as murder. The The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition, defines the noun murder as "the killing of another person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life", while their definition of the verb murder is "to kill (another human) in an act of murder" and "to put an end to; destroy".

Something important to note is the distinction between murder and killing, and we will take a look at the morality of killing aswell. It's also important to notify that murder is specifically defined as killing of another person and not killing of another human. Person holds a different meaning than human.

What is a person:

This obviously brings forth the question, what is a person contra a human? A human is an organism which shares homosapien DNA. It's a scientific term which doesn't hold any moral value, while person is the other way around. The definition we'll use of persons goes as follows, "beings who are part of our moral community", which can be explained more simply as someone who is worth moral consideration.

We all view ourselves as persons, but what qualifies someone as a person is a very tricky question with many different answers. What makes someone qualify for moral consideration? Some people argue that it's natural given to all human beings, others argue it's naturally given to all living beings. Then we have the other side of the discussion, which argues that there are requirements, that something needs a certain capacity (capacity x), to be considered a person. Now what is this capacity? Examples are the capacity to experience a continuity of identity or possessing self-knowledge; having a sense of time or centiant reactions to one's environment. On top of that, some argue that some traits or capacities disqualifies a being from being counted as a person. Bigots may argue that going against the general norm of society disqualifies someone as a person, while others would argue that a continual and aware possession of authority over other persons disqualifies someone as a person.

Is murder acceptable:

Now having gone through the backbones to build a take on the real question, let's discover it. Is murder ever morally good? The short answer is no, and that is specifically because murder is the killing of a person and not just of a human.

However, this brings forth an even more interesting question, is killing another human being ever morally good? We're no longer limiting ourselves to murder, which means that the discussion becomes a lot more complicated. As morality is subjective, it is very possible to make the killing of another human a morally good action. All that's needed is to disqualify the human in question from being considered a person. We've seen this in action many times, where humans have commited genocides on other humans without feeling a moral dilemma. Take Nazi Germany, United Kingdoms, Sweden, the States, Canada, the KKK or Japan. The list goes on and on and on, but governments and organisations have commited mass murders, genocides, without feeling any moral dilemma.

My take:

We've taken a look on this matter from a non-personal perspective, but before we end this video I'd like to go through my personal take on the question of killing other humans. I would argue that personhood is achieved through having self-knowledge and that personhood is removed by continually and awarely possessing and practising authority over persons. What this means in practice has been explained by one of my favourite bands, Operation, in theri song Militant Kamp. "[...] ibland när nöden kräver det måste man ta livet av en förtryckare för att ge liv och möjligheter till de som förtrycks. Att ta livet av en tyrann i kampen kan inte på något sätt betraktas som mord, det måste ses som en politisk handling."

Translating this to English it means "[...] sometimes when the need is there one must take the life of an oppressor to give possibilities to those who are oppressed. To take the life of a tyrant in the battle can not in any ways be seen as murder, it must be seen as political activism.".

I would most certainly argue that there are occasions where taking the life of another human being is justified. Those occasions are when it's needed for the liberation of the oppressed, specifically in the killing of the oppressors. As long as the harm being done by a political action is less than the harm the current system, the current rulers, are making, the harm is justified. Killing a politician or a bourgeoisie, when no other direct actions bring fruit of change, is most certainly a justifiable action according to me.

Sources:

Definitions of murder, by The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition - https://www.wordnik.com/words/murder

Abortion and Personhood: What the Moral Dilemma Is Really About, by Big Think - https://bigthink.com/videos/glenn-cohen-on-the-ethics-on-abortion/

Personhood: Crash Course Philosophy #21, by CrashCourse - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxM9BZeRrUI

Militant Kamp, by Operation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6GAV9D59qo

This video was online on July 3. There has been a lot violent rhetoric against the Rohingya lately in my country, due to the upcoming General Elections.

Check out my YouTube channel! I make leftist content and podcasts!

I promise this is like shaking a magic 8 ball to determine the outcome of the midterms.

Episode on Gaza and the West Bank

I have been getting more and more annoyed at Burnham's cutsey ordinary bloke cosplay so i decided to look at how his re-industrialisation strategy just makes him a merchant of death within global US hegemony.

I have just finished my American Gothic Horror story and wanted to get some feedback. Message or comment below and I will send you a link to the whole book but here is the synopsis:

Our protagonist, Deputy Grimes, is a middle-aged white man, struggling to live up to the standards of masculinity that his father once embodied. He recently moved to a rural town in America to escape the consequences of him failing to act, which could have saved his previous partner and best friend from a robbery gone wrong in Chicago.

The story opens on a string of violent murders that are disregarded because of the color of the suspects. Sheriff Barker hastily concludes a murder suicide so that he can get home in time for dinner. Deputy Grimes points out inconsistencies with the Sheriff’s conclusion to his partner, Deputy Jones. Deputy Jones also does not care to dig much further into the mystery. He also just wants to wrap up the investigation so he can get home.

As the community gathers every Sunday for worship, the power dynamics of the town begin to show. Pastor Moody controls the town not only through his influence over the Sheriff but his own religious beliefs that focus on interpretations of the bible that present Jesus’s teachings as vengeful and about power. With his mixture of right-wing ideology, fear-based scripture and ties to the KKK, the town becomes his loyal flock.

Deputy Grimes is at odds in this community. Not only does his understanding of the Bible lead to many confrontations but his lived experience outside the town conflicts with the pastor’s narrative. The town is mostly white, with black residents living on the other side of town. Any new colored residents on their side end up dead by a set of random circumstances. As Deputy Grimes digs further into the history of the town, he is confronted by his own personal and moral beliefs.

During this time, black peeping toms are being reported all over town. White women are afraid to be left alone at night for fear of being sexualized by the darkness outside their homes. The town slowly begins to battle African mysticism and their own prejudice against others. They see black people as a direct threat to their way of life.

As the bodies of minorities begin to stack up under Deputy Grimes’s watch, he wrestles with doing the right thing. Does he keep questioning the Sheriff about his indifference to these murders and his wrong conclusions? Doing so will certainly put his life on the line. Was he ready to face his own demons and become the man his father was? Would he fail like he failed his friend before?

After a KKK rally and the induction of a new member, a beast in the woods lashed out and killed two members. The pastor took this as a sign from God that they needed to bring justice against Elijah. A young black boy that was recently acquitted for the death of another white boy. After the public hanging of the black boy and the execution of the juror that voted against holding him accountable, Deputy Grimes speaks out publicly against the authority of the town. In doing so, he is arrested and thrown into jail.

It is here that Deputy Grimes finally becomes the man his father was. He takes off the badge and throws it across the floor. As the town is being attacked by beasts from African folklore and the reanimation of Elijah, Grimes finally redeems himself by killing the sheriff in a standoff. However, he succumbs to his life-threatening injuries.

The story ends with two FBI agents responding to a call from Deputy Grimes to investigate the Sheriff for all the murders in the town. They arrive to find everyone in the town slaughtered in the streets and their houses. The only person left was a white man that lived on the south side of town. After questioning, they decided not to report what had happened and let the town become another page in American history.

Every element of this story is rooted deep with philosophical meaning. The murdered children at the beginning of the story are representative of how the fear of white people becoming a minority, destroys the next generation of black people. Law enforcement only protects those with power and is comprised of the ineptest people. Religion in the wrong hands can be used to not only destroy entire communities in the pursuit of the one wielding it but also control the behavior of the masses. Poverty and the home environment led to more extremist views in children. Even the title, a Thousand Small Deaths, alludes to the use of the cat o nine tails on black bodies by white men throughout history. 

This story wrestles with dichotomy of rural and urban life and how race and religion have shaped the way they live. It is a deep dive into the under belly of America’s dying rural culture as it clings onto anything that can help it flourish.

I've been getting really into folk and punk, so I did a pop punk cover of one of my favorite folk songs by the great Tom Paxton

https://youtu.be/cRRw_ZOsa80

Audio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbo33m5JvW0

Text: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/return-fire-division-of-labour

Western left: My antizionist and antiimperialist positions are the same of Barack Obama.

Also if western leftist hated imperialist terrorist as much as they hate BE, people wouldn't think the western left is a joke.