Self Defense/Private Idahos, Violence, and Subcultures/Groups
I'll give this another shot.
Related to another question I asked.
Looking back at my followup, I admit that I not only went through super=large paragraphs but even went all over the place to unrelated stuff as far as my followup question to he above link. Thus my message was last and I understand why you sent a "this topic is too large" response. Because the way I was asking it was so convoluted and touches too big an issue.
So I'm going to attempt to be more specific this time.
I mention that my religious studies professor was incredibly shocked that right now the norm of so many self-proclaimed "religious experts" (without degrees) outside of academia is that Islam is a false religion because a violent sexist warlord wrote it to consolidate power.
As I mentioned last time, all her years of studying religion and working for academia not once has she ever seen any theologian or comparative religion scholar state such a BS. She was so rocked that many "experts" in mainstream media such as Fox News and mainstream writings such as John Hagee's Jerusalem Countdown (a pro-Israeli work that bashes not just Islam but even the Catholic Church, atheists, and other groups).
She decided to start going into the outside and debate with people openly. I warned her to take a bodyguard with her and I also asked her to call me so I can join in such debates whenever she decided to go on such debates.
In addition I also mentioned about violent subcultures (or at least subcultures that tend to be close-minded) in addition to being so intolerant bigots, not only are few of them even aware of what the founders of their group actually intended for it to function and even personally oppose the group's bigoted or violent tendencies, members of such groups are so ignorant and out of touch even with mainstream society that their beliefs even clash with whatever prejudiced narrative mainstream society has (such as many members of the Neo-Nazi skinhead movement not even knowing that Hitler's first name was Adolf and that he was born in Austria- facts that even the real Nazis from World War II knew as a basic tidbit). Some even literally believing Hitler was blonde!
I also mentioned for years I frequently debated with people and was always courteous and polite, even respecting the other person's opinion and willing to keep an open mind to the possibility the people I'm debating with may be correct (even if their views are racist and bigoted). It wasn't until that incident I had with the redneck years ago I mentioned in the link (along with a few other rednecks who also tried to attack me but this time I subdued them because I've been learning BJJ, judo and wrestling) that I'm being attacked despite following every rules of debate of remaining civil. Every debate I had prior (especially within my debate clubs and history classes), not once was I ever attacked.
I will also state that in the link, it was first time I ever interacted with a redneck and most other violent incidents I had afterwards after trying to engage in a civil debate was mostly with rednecks.
Now I had to bring back those details because just last weekend my religious studies professor finally had her debates with members of the church dominion whom I showed to her a book that was writing such negative (and erroneous) stuff about Islam.
I had a feeling shit was going to happen so I brought along a muscular friend of mine (who's a football player) along with a policeman (who's also a friend of mine). My professor also brought with her some other professors and one of the university police.
So we began to debate with members of the church dominion at the city's local public auditorium (because these guys were not degreed "experts" nor were they famed enough to qualify to enter into university grounds for a public lecture or debate).
About 30 minutes into the debate the church dominion members simply began to holler over and over "Islam is evil! The Quran is a work written by the devil! The Prophet is a pedophile!" and other such stuff. Without quoting a source other than the book published by their dominion. A little over an hour, one of the church members got out from their side of the stage and rush towards my professor and punched her. I had to intervene and pin this church member into submission. The rest of the church group began to jump out and charge towards the university professors. I was actually being stomped by several and my football player friend and the two policemen who accompanied us had to intervene. While most of the church group stopped upon police intervention and went back to their corner, one member was actually STUPID enough to attack my policemen friend and he had to do block some blows before turning the assault around and pinning said church member in an armlock and locking him in armcuffs.
My friend cop took the church member with him into his car and drove him to jail along with the other guy who threw the first blow at my professor and escalated the whole thing into a group monkey dance assault.
The whole debate was cutoff because most other members of the church had participated in the assault and thus were being held their int he auditorium on the spot as backup came.
When we met the following Monday at University, my professor was gloomy, showing signs of emotional trauma. I already knew she was probably had her whole world rocked and I talked to her in an attempt to calm her down (and I also mentioned the incident in my previous AllExpert question where was I was attacked by a redneck back in high school along with the other people I mentioned in my attempted follow up (other rednecks, the hardcore marine at the public speech, etc). She was incredibly shocked that people would act so violent in a civil debate and she thanked me for bringing some friends and warning her to bring a police to the debate.
She is now traumatized and have since always requested some police (and even hired bodyguards) everytime she goes into a debate (even within school campus).
Now I done some research into the said church members and I learned not only did several of them dropped out of high school but they all work within the Church organization. In addition anecdotes from church members I interviewed whoa re not as radical (in preparation for the upcoming court case because my professor really intends to sue them), I learned these church members do nothing but read their church's "authorized" edition of the Bible and even in their freetime they spend in Church (as in after work hours they go to Church so sing hymns or read the Bible, some of them even sleeping there as their home). Eye witness accounts also told me they NEVER interact with people outside of the organization. As in they don't even go to Walmart to shop for basic food.
Basically their whole world is so wrapped up around their specific church that they don't even know who Justin Bieber is and they cling together like crabs, doing activities that reinforce their worldviews.
But the part I can't understand is that prior to my professor arranging a debate with them, they were NEVER known to be have acted violent. In fact everyone who knew them (all from the same church) always described them as polite and always eager to donate their hard earned money for church charities.
TO bring up a similar situation, the rednecks I had a debate with were rarely violent people according to testimonies when I sued them in court. However they had a record of punching people from other subcultures (especially those so heavily involved with certain ethnicities such as the rap subculture). And from what my lawyer discovered when he was preparing for my case in court, often in thee violent cases they were arrested for it started when members from other subcultures were trying to have a debate about a certain topic. The rednecks who I mentioned not only were offended (even though the people they hit were trying to be polite and civil in the debate) but were completely ignorant about the topic being discussed. One of them even had the nerve to hit a policeman simply because he was trying to defend the gothic subculture.
In a similar vain, the neo Nazi skinheads I mentioned actually rarely ever had a criminal record (save for those who's been imprisoned and hardcore). In fact I can't quote it right now but I recall a university paper about how interviews with the skinhead members and studies of the skinhead movement records that despite all the media outrage about frequent racist attacks by skinhead white supremacists, very few had criminal records and in fact most were described as being nonviolent by people outside the skinhead movement no matter how racist they are. I mean the paper even mentioned some blacks Europeans who despise the skinhead movement but also admit that very few of the local crimes were committed by skinheads and they were less likely to be threatened by a random skinhead than the general populace of said European country. In fact a few black Europeans even described individual skinheads as just minding their own business and being respectful when they interact with nonwhites when traveling outside of the skinhead subculture.
However the paper also mentions that when the skinhead culture finally interacts with a large amount of outsiders-in particular when said outsider intrudes their "territory"- a lot of violence against non-white European starts. This is especially common if non-white immigrants starts migrating to towns with a large skinhead subculture.
I'm risking asking this even though I might end up getting another "can't respond to question because the topic is too big". But after my professor getting assaulted-DESPITE beings someone supported by the system and even having policeman around- and the fact I was assaulted in a public area (full of cops) by a marine and had to wrestle said marine into submission because he was pissed off by a public speech I made that he felt was anti-USMC (even though I specifically made my paper to be biased as pro-marine and to avoid pissing people off), I had to ask this question. Before I add more details that will turn this into a rant, I'll ask the basic thing right now.
Is the fact that so many of us are "living in our own Private Idahoes" a prime factor to why so much of us never experience violence (especially for the intellectuals and middle class of this society) especially with regards to interaction with violent groups and debating about controversial subjects?
Is it also a reason why violent subcultures and cultic groups can often exist without getting into trouble with the law and mainstream society? I mean with the way media always emphasizing when KKK members burn down houses, you'd think that the KKK shouldn't even exist anymore because the narrative is that they are so violent racists that they attack people all the time. With such a narrative, wouldn't they be all in jail already and the KKK be disbanded as a result? Because as an example, very few KKK members today actually engage in racial crimes and most are living among themselves peacefully.
However, as I experienced with the rednecks and as what happened at the auditorium with the church members, I note that when their Private Idahos are shattered and they suddenly find themselves interacting with other subcultures or groups int he rest of society, these groups suddenly become so violent. I mean we're not talking about the group Monkey Dance in which say a black person steps into a town dominated by KKK members. I mean in which they are forced to leave their home and go into other groups' territory. I mean when these rednecks hit me, they were living in California-a liberal state-and my lawyer told me when were were preparing over cases that many of those rednecks who I am suing came from small town in the Southern states. When they finally started acting so violent was when the moved to California and were forced to be alongside with other ethnic groups and subcultures (who they happen to have strongly conflicting narratives with).
The Church group I had to physically restrain with the help of my football player friend and police never go into a debate before and practically spending their whole lives stuck in their local church, interacting with no one else but church members. As we prepare for the upcoming trial next month, many other goers at the same Church cannot believe they would act so violent because they were such Saints in church.
So I am curious. Is it because of "Private Idahos" that many groups that espouse disturbing worldviews aren't as violent as they possibly could be? Related to my last question, can this be a reason by the intellectual class-and not just professors and people protected by the system but even amateurs without degrees who read just for the sake of learning- rarely gets physically assaulted? Because they living so separately from members of other groups that they rarely will find themselves clashing?
Oh the above paragraph is stupid. But on a macro level, does Private Idahos play a role into preventing (or minimizing) violence?
I mean even though I was expecting possible violence, I was incredibly shocked that the Church members were stupid enough to even strike the cops at the debate. None of the targets in this debate were safe at all so your previous response, while definitely a key reason why academics rarely get attacked, made me wonder if there are factors beyond this.
This whole long winded thing could be summed up in this: Oh the above paragraph is stupid. But on a macro level, does Private Idahos play a role into preventing (or minimizing) violence?
And the answer is: Because they living so separately from members of other groups that they rarely will find themselves clashing?
You literally answered your own question before you answered it
Unless it's an 'honor culture,' self-isolation LIMITS violence. The people know the rules. They share the same ideals and beliefs and for the most part they can just go about their daily business.
There's also something called "sunset segregation" that is where people from different cultures and beliefs mix during the day, but come night fall either go home or get the hell out of their turf. Once again folks know the rules and they manage to get along.
Honor cultures throw a bit of a wobbler into this equation -- as they tend to be much more physically violent.
But also realize there's a toxic mix brewing right now
You can look at it from the standpoint that your traumatized teacher (coming from a dignity culture) did not expect to be physically assaulted. That's a common misconception among dignity culture folks and -- I suspect -- a big part of their trauma. OMG! He hit me!
Here's a thing, people don't become violent over facts. They will however become violent over beliefs.
Now it is trendy these days to look down at your nose for people 'with beliefs.' Because we're so intellectual and informed that we don't have beliefs, doncha know?
Except those same people don't understand they are just as belief ridden and driven as the ignorant fools they look down upon. Or that they're JUST as willing to use violence to protect their beliefs -- except unlike honor cultures, they use proxies. See you look at what happened as you, the cop and football player defended her. Except you went there ready to use violence to protect her. Because you and she both believe someone shouldn't be attacked over just words. And violence occurred... on both sides. And while one can argue 'for different reasons' the fact is the violence from both sides came from a clash of beliefs.
from dignity cultures also