Mos Def undergoes force-feeding for Guantanamo

[fhdz]

You are acting like they have all sorts of options.

They could've contacted a sympathetic Congressman to make them aware of the fact.

Why would they trust a US politician at this point, when even Obama went back on the promise to shut down Gitmo? Serious question.

But D was joking so...

Sometimes it's hard to tell with him.

[DGuller]

 

[Maximus]

Relevant to what, why you should care?  That's up to you.  Why they are doing this?  Because they have few other options, and it doesn't look like they'll be leaving this prison any time soon if ever.

I know why they do it. It is because people pay attention to it. The question is why people pay attention to it.

You are acting like they have all sorts of options.

I am not. Their options or lack thereof are not relevant to the question as I have pointed out.

It's not essentially a temper tantrum.  A temper tantrum is a costless, transparent ploy. 

It is not unheard of for a child to hold their breath until they pass out as part of a temper tantrum. While a child may be unaware of the full consequences of their actions, an adult prisoner is not.

[frunk]

I know why they do it. It is because people pay attention to it. The question is why people pay attention to it.

The presumption is that the controllers of a prison are responsible for the life of the prisoner.  If prisoners start dying all over the place at a prison the wardens are held accountable.  If the prisoner is a suicide risk measures are taken to prevent that from happening.  A hunger strike equates to "if things don't change I'll kill myself", and so it should be paid attention to.  What is an appropriate response is a different question.

[fhdz]

I am not. Their options or lack thereof are not relevant to the question as I have pointed out.

The amount of options someone has to redress their grievances is not only relevant, it is pretty much the heart of the question. If something as severe as a large-scale hunger strike is taking place, it is because the prisoners lack less severe options of making their plight known.

Which of course begs the question: do you even consider being held indefinitely without trial under adverse conditions a plight? If not, it's obvious why the hunger strike makes no sense to you or why you liken it to a child's temper tantrum.

[Maximus]

I think I have stated several times now that the reason for the strike is not in question. It is known about as much as these things can be known. It is even a very effective tactic for people in that situation to take.

Again the question is not why do they use an effective tactic. The question is why is this tactic effective in general. Completely orthogonal to that question is whether in this instance someone's situation can be considered a plight. That question can only serve as a red herring in this discussion.

[Jacob]

Because many people feel empathy for those who are stuck in unrelentingly grim situations, especially when those unrelentingly grim situations are supposedly carried out in their names and in the name of justice.

[Berkut]

Still haven't heard any suggestions for what they should have done instead.

[Maximus]

Because many people feel empathy for those who are stuck in unrelentingly grim situations, especially when those unrelentingly grim situations are supposedly carried out in their names and in the name of justice.

Certainly. And no doubt they would feel even more empathy if said people worsened their situation voluntarily.

The question is "why?". Actually it is not so much a question as an expression of wonderment. I was not expecting an answer, I was expecting comprehension.

[crazy canuck]

Where I think you go wrong Max, is your underlying assumption that they are "voluntarily" making their situation worse.  You are ignoring the fact they are doing this to improve their situation.

Your position is akin to "I dont understand why some skinny Indian dude is voluntarily making his situation worse.  life in colonial India sucks.  We all know that."

[Maximus]

 

For the fifth time, I understand why they are doing it. Anyone who doesn't understand that by now isn't going to. I am finished with that line of questioning.

[Berkut]

I don't think I have any difficulty understanding the concept behind this - it is a demand for attention. It is saying "Hey, you assholes, FUCKING LOOK AT WHAT IS GOING ON!".

That is either noble or ridiculous, based on the situation in question.

I, as much as it is possible, understand the anger and frustration of those people still stuck, seemingly forever, in that prison.

However, my understanding of the overall situation also means that their hunger strike doesn't change my views on it, since I was not unaware of the circumstances before the hunger strike.

It sucks. The entire thing really, really sucks. I wish I knew how to "fix" it, but I don't. The fact that Obama cannot figure it out, despite being the person with the most power, most knowledge, and a lot of desire (I believe both personally and poltiically) to fix it suggests to me that there really isn't much of a fix.

[fhdz]

For the fifth time, I understand why they are doing it. Anyone who doesn't understand that by now isn't going to. I am finished with that line of questioning.

I guess what makes people question your understanding might be instances like when you compare it to a child's temper tantrum.

[Berkut]

For the fifth time, I understand why they are doing it. Anyone who doesn't understand that by now isn't going to. I am finished with that line of questioning.

I guess what makes people question your understanding might be instances like when you compare it to a child's temper tantrum.

But it is very much like a child's temper tantrum.

It is an attempt to draw attention to oneself using any means necessary.

That doesn't make it a bad thing per se, but the analogy is perfectly apt.

[fhdz]

Again the question is not why do they use an effective tactic. The question is why is this tactic effective in general.

I think several people in this thread have admirably addressed that question - it's an appeal to our common humanity and our distaste for suffering; it's a severe step which causes people to wonder what could be happening which is so bad that it requires a hunger strike as a last ditch effort to try and resolve it; it forces us, through its severity and nonviolence, to examine whether or not this enterprise being carried out in the name of justice is in fact just. Etc.

Are you skimming past those responses, or are you not agreeing with them?