The accelerationist shooter in Germany is being criticized on some websites for both his “low score” and his failure to kill any Jews. Meanwhile in South Africa, a group of black criminals were much more successful in killing a high profile target.
“A brilliant psychologist and specialist in hate crime and violence in South Africa was brutally butchered and had her throat slit in her own home by a gang of armed robbers.
Leading scholar Dr Mirah Wilks was ambushed and attacked by the men who had waited until her husband Frank left to worship at the local synagogue, leaving her home alone.
The group had climbed up onto the roof and removed tiles and dropped down inside the house and stabbed Mirah at least twelve times in the chest and back then cut her throat.
Retired husband Frank, 72, returned home from evening worship on Sunday night and found the blood soaked body of his wife of 45 years lying dead on the floor of the family home. …”
This isn’t accelerationist terrorism.
This is nothing but the usual black violence in South Africa. I haven’t seen it take out a such a high profile target like this though since Steven Otter went down.
“There are multiple truths on South African university campuses at this time of the 2016 # Fees must Fall. Social media is rapidly shaped and defined by incendiary hate speech, hate crimes against sexual minorities, blatant racism, and a grotesque paucity of moral reasoning. How did this happen in the rarefied spaces of Socrates, Fanon and Mandoza? Who is the uber arbiter of this ultimate and singular truth? And what do we do with that noble information? Fundamental to being a moral minded practitioner professional, there should be a modicum of deep thinking. According to REBT founder, Albert Ellis, in using such words as should, could and would, we enter the world of irrational thinking. We need to find it within us to dispute such improbable thoughts and language in those that are determined to uphold irrationalities as truths.
Decolonisation of language is an essential start. Reconsideration of the oppression and suppression of human rights is a necessary way forward. Thinking in ways that don’t support the enslavement of ideas and human rights, such as: sanctioned gender-based violence, corrective rape, economic abuse, genocide and endemic intolerance, is fundamental for moral change. In professionally adhering to the Ethical injunction to do ”No Harm”, who decides if we inadvertently harm others, by either our omissions (oversights, exclusions, lapses) or our commissions ( instructions, contracts, directives)? Should there be some latitude for moral ineptitude?
While we all fuel up self-righteously on our Constitutional Human Rights, when do we show our humanity? To whom to we show our social responsibility? When do we take 17 the time to really hear the Other? What is our rush to discount or marginalise the Other? And why are we so good at sustaining the path most travelled?”
As a moral minded professional, one wonders if Dr. Mirah Wilks showed her social responsibility in her final moments. Did she take the time to really hear the Other in South Africa? Did she discount or marginalize the Others who broke into her home and cut her throat?
Note: I don’t wish a fate like this upon anyone. Listen to this bullshit though. This is the sort of rhetoric that inspired the shooter in Germany.