Re: OfB.biz: It's Official: SCO Declares IP Jihad on Linux

On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 11:53:27PM -0400, Timothy R. Butler wrote:
> * A jihad is a "a holy war waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty
> [or] a crusade for a principle or belief."
>  
>   Now, at least in the current understanding however, much as you note, Jihad 
> does have more of a negative connotation, and is thus more appropriate for a 
> negative headline than crusade. It is also a term close to memory for most 
> people atm, which makes it fit better as well.

Jihad means nothing more than "struggle to survive". Yes, it can include
war, but by no means does it *mean* war. You don't declare Jihad either,
it's there, whether you want to or not, kind of like the Hindu
tantra/karma/nirvana/samsara/etcetera system.

It's nothing more than the daily life struggles every Muslim has to go
through. Some Muslims interpret that as "holy war". Most Muslims don't.

>   Consider this: "SCO Declares Crusade against Linux" and "SCO Declares Jihad 
> against Linux"... which gets the point across better? 

Neither. SCO is in a jihad against Linux because of Linux' marketshare. It
*has* to respond to survive. The better headline would be "SCO's Jihad: War
On Linux".

>   But, back to my point. Just because Jihad had religious, perhaps even 
> commendable, orgins, its popular usage is quickly forming based on the 
> visable usage of it by groups such as al-Qaeda. As such, I am using the newly 
> formed secular usage and not the older religious usage.

So you're one of the assholes who turned hacker into a bad name as well? 
> 
>   Consider this: the term "born again" was a term of great spiritual 
> significance to the Christian Church at least since the writing of the Gospel 
> of John around 90 AD. However, since the 1970's Christians have been forced 
> to find a new term, as born again in the United States now often refers to 
> stuff like used cars, refurbished vacuums, etc.
> 
>   While most Christians aren't happy about this, certainly no one is going to 
> say that someone "incorrectly" using that term is hateful of the Christian 
> Church.

Santorum maybe, but that's a different topic.

>   Jihad is a vivid picture of a war at the moment, and more precisely a war(s) 
> in which it would seem the one issuing the war is very convinced to the 
> rightness of the battle. Further, most of those on the outside see the jihads 
> negatively -- suicide bombings, innocent civilians killed, etc. Thus it's the 
> term that fits. I would note, if the most vocal Muslims didn't use the term 
> Jihad in the sense of physical, asymmetrical warfare, but rather as a 
> personal inner struggle, that wouldn't be the case.

Ask any serious muslim organization and they'll explain it. I suppose this
is a symptom of mass media channels: whatever words they use or copy come into
play.

Given the responses on the list, I say it's a bit too early to use the
secular jihad as you did and one should stick to the religious use. But as
soon as I see "Pepsi's Jihad against Coca-Cola" in the papers, I'll remember
you.

>   This all comes down to the secularization of words. For instance, I was 
> reading the other day about Christian ministers going to some kind of Study 
> of Christ mecca. What a sec... when people think about that, it doesn't make 
> much sense. Mecca, of course, being the holiest city of Islam. 
> 
>   For that matter, I can be trying to find a good pork farmer to buy sausage 
> from and decide that one guy really seems to be kosher. That again, doesn't 
> make much sense, but it has been said. 
> 
>   It's all a matter of taking the words in context for the popular meaning.
> 
>   See what I mean?

I see perfectly, I just don't think jihad is as secular as mecca or kosher yet, or
heaven or hell, or even Jesus Christ or goddamned! (most people won't use
those words in religious context, I assume)

Rob
-- 
Rob Kaper     | "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
[email protected] | temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
www.capsi.com | - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+uPzctppIl2G1SjcRAg4JAJ0fvUYimrQZIqlYxcdqQ5sh0vWRbwCfdCjP
KdQc+iqAI8BZ4CEFZxzMKdY=
=o8qx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----