Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Christes]

Video from the battles today. There's something absurd over the whole clip.

I laughed when the guy called Gaddafi a jew.

[Aqizzar]

Rebel is an insult now?

To them yes. Rebellion is Kadhafi movement, so technically they are loyalists.
Not really a semantic thing, just a connotation (a bit silly in this forum since there is no one  to offend, but it come from a good intention).
It was wrong to call them rebel earlier though : hen they were just protesters severely repressed.

I really don't understand why there is an argument going on here.  There is an official government in Libya, Qaddafi's government.  There is another newly formed ad-hoc government in Benghazi.  They both have semi-organized paramilitary arms, which are in open shooting conflict with each other, which the express goal of establishing one government and crushing the other.  They are rebels, and the term "rebel" is not an insult.  Heck, if I was on the Benghazi side, I'd be proud to be called a rebel.

They're rebelling against Qaddafi's rule, and quite physically so.  What is everyone getting so bent out of shape over?

[Boksi]

Rebel is an insult now?

To them yes. Rebellion is Kadhafi movement, so technically they are loyalists.
Not really a semantic thing, just a connotation (a bit silly in this forum since there is no one  to offend, but it come from a good intention).
It was wrong to call them rebel earlier though : hen they were just protesters severely repressed.

I really don't understand why there is an argument going on here.  There is an official government in Libya, Qaddafi's government.  There is another newly formed ad-hoc government in Benghazi.  They both have semi-organized paramilitary arms, which are in open shooting conflict with each other, which the express goal of establishing one government and crushing the other.  They are rebels, and the term "rebel" is not an insult.  Heck, if I was on the Benghazi side, I'd be proud to be called a rebel.

They're rebelling against Qaddafi's rule, and quite physically so.  What is everyone getting so bent out of shape over?

Because to them, Qaddafi's regime is the rebellion. Calling the "protesters" rebels is, to them, like saying that they're just the same as Qaddafi.

[Bouchart]

Also of major note is the fact that the Saudi stock market has had a fairly major selloff in the past couple of days.

[Nadaka]

The problem is that Qadaffi's revolution never ended, his government is internally effectively defined as a rebellion even today. So when they hear the term rebel, they associate that with the regime.

[Bouchart]

And there's a very important election in Ireland on Friday that might take a lot of focus off of the middle east and back onto the Eurozone periphery.

[Aqizzar]

Because to them, Qaddafi's regime is the rebellion. Calling the "protesters" rebels is, to them, like saying that they're just the same as Qaddafi.

The problem is that Qadaffi's revolution never ended, his government is internally effectively defined as a rebellion even today. So when they hear the term rebel, they associate that with the regime.

I find it very hard to believe that a person who's spent their entire life governed by a one guy's personality cult is going to consider that government the "rebellion".  I'll believe this linguistic psychoanalysis when a Libyan comes in to explain it.  Until then, I'm going to assert it's meaningless semantics that just muddies the issue, because it makes it hard to tell which side is doing what when nobody can agree which side is supposed to be called the "loyalists" or "rebels", especially since I haven't seen a news report that reflects this "Qaddafi is the real rebellion" idea.

[Aqizzar]

Of course I have, and it's idiocy.  Plenty of autocratic governments call themselves the "real" rebellion, typically long after whatever it was they rebelled against has faded into obscurity, because it's a rhetorical cloak of justifying austere measures.  It's the same as that thirty-year "state of emergency" in Egypt.  That's why I don't play along with the name game, and I don't know why anyone else does, because I bet most people in Libya don't give a shit what Qaddafi calls himself either.

[Sowelu]

The name gives them a bad taste in their mouth.  It's personal preference, it's semantics, it's the way that Hitler ruined a perfectly good moustache--just on a different and more local scale.

[Puzzlemaker]

Names can be incredibly important, if only because people don't realize they are pointless.

[Realmfighter]

Names can be incredibly important, if only because people don't realize they are pointless.

"Names are important, because people don't know that they aren't important"

[Puzzlemaker]

Names can be incredibly important, if only because people don't realize they are pointless.

"Names are important, because people don't know that they aren't important"

Haha, probably a better way to put it.  Is that from something?

[Realmfighter]

I was restating your statement so people could fully appreciate it's dual Rationality/Irrationality on every one of its multiple layers.

[Zrk2]

Of course I have, and it's idiocy.  Plenty of autocratic governments call themselves the "real" rebellion, typically long after whatever it was they rebelled against has faded into obscurity, because it's a rhetorical cloak of justifying austere measures.  It's the same as that thirty-year "state of emergency" in Egypt.  That's why I don't play along with the name game, and I don't know why anyone else does, because I bet most people in Libya don't give a shit what Qaddafi calls himself either.

Amen. Call it whatever the hell you want, he's still not a revolutionary. A is still A, no matter how much you claim it is B.

[SalmonGod]

I was restating your statement so people could fully appreciate it's dual Rationality/Irrationality on every one of its multiple layers.

Analogy in defense of the statement's rationality.

"Political party labels are important, because people are more likely to vote based on them than the actual qualities of the candidates."