So begins the lady’s article, describing a professor lady’s work.
“Youth honor killing” is a meme which may be susceptible to change, if you’re going to treat memes as infections. It may even be possible to do so without violating the 1st Amendment, though I doubt it. If so, it is self-evidently worth doing. But “violence”? I see several problems here. One is that violence is absolutely necessary to a free society. Let’s use a collectivist metaphor and pretend that society is the human body, made up of millions of cells all working together. We declare non-violence on a cellular level. No foreign bacteria are allowed to attack…and the immune system is not allowed to counterattack. Now, the minute you have one exception, one bacterium that enters the body and does not play by the “no violence” rule, the body is toast. You cannot eliminate violence without becoming food for the violent…which is ultimately what happened to Ghandi, and would have happened sooner had he not been working against a Christian and conflicted nation.
The other problem: what do you do if the violent do not want to give up the violence meme on their own? The conquest of infectious diseases rests on violence: mandatory vaccination, quarantine, tax-funded research, tax-funded water and sewer treatment. It is reasonable to assume that the conquest of the violence meme would likewise require violence. Now, how the hell are you going to do that, wiping out an idea by practicing the idea? If Dr. Hyphenated-Name really wants to get rid of violence, she should be praying, because God is the only being who can do that.
It’s also amusing to see the hand-wringing about “a Founding Father” killed in a duel. Alexander Hamilton was the Founding Father most deserving of an early and violent death as a counterrevolutionary.
