I strongly support the initiative. I consider pertinent the
observations of Prof. Sibertin and Prof. Dilaver. Prof. Dilaver
proposes us to consider the situation from a deeply critical point of
view, taking into account that in both sides (west and east,
Christians and Muslims, Capitalists and non Capitalists) we have those
who make (or even fabricate, design) the war and the invasions and
destruction of countries (ISIS, govs., corporations), and those who
suffer it (people, children), what, I believe, is part of the original
motivation.

Best regards,

Oswaldo

On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Ozge Dilaver <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Wander - Dear all,
>
> I think it is an excellent idea to make a position against IS terror and
> political violence in general.
>
> I am, on the other hand, concerned not to give yet another ‘us’ and ‘them’
> message, even if it is a subtle one like in Wander’s original text, because
> I think it would very much defy the purpose. Personally, I find the
> politicians’  ‘attack to Western/European values’ discourse that is repeated
> after each horrible massacre very void, when it is so clear that those
> values were never applied during numerous military operations of the west to
> the rest of the world. And as one of the biggest debates of the week in the
> UK was whether the opposition leader bowed to the queen or not, I don’t find
> it very sincere to preach about dogmas, or to imply it is only us that has
> critical thinking.
>
> Wander’s text touches upon the terror committed by states as well with his
> reference to drones, but the grave situation in Iraq and Syria is partly--
> if not mostly-- created by the military operations in the region and arguing
> problems there can now be solved with more internet so that people can start
> doing what we do, is taking the horror faced there a little too lightly.
> After all, about the same number of civilians who sadly died in Paris this
> week dies in these countries on a daily basis.
>
> What I am trying to say is perhaps trying not to define the issue as between
> us the scientist of the free world with critical reasoning, and those who
> need more of 'what we do’.
>
> In this regard, I came across NPA’s (New Anti-capitalist Party) declaration
> by Julien Salingue on Facebook which seems to be popular amongst youth
> movements. Their slogan is ‘vos guerres, nos morts’ (your wars, our dead)
> better placed between the people of the world at one side, and the
> aggressive politicians closely linked to aggressive corporations together
> with IS at the other.
>
> I wonder if you would agree it would be better to phrase our position as
> part of a global humanity versus violence rather than any implications of
> ‘us’ versus ‘them'.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ozge
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15 Nov 2015, at 10:15, Ianni A. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Wander,
>
> Thanks for this initiative. Please count me in.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Antonella
>
> Ps: On a minor note: please note
> 'drones packed with with explosives'.
>
> Dr. A. Ianni| Department  of Economics | University of Southampton |
> http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/ianni/
> |https://antonellaianni.youcanbook.me<https://antonellaianni.youcanbook.me/>/
> |
>
>
> On 15 Nov 2015, at 09:30, Osinga, Sjoukje
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Dear Wander,
>
>
> I like your initiative and I like the unanimous responses.
>
> Chen, I like your changeto the first sentence of the message (to add mutual
> understanding). I also liked Wander's original sentence because it's plain
> and 'energetic', (not split into parts separated by three commas).
>
>
> I think we shouldn't wait too long anymore (the momentum is now).
>
> The statement has everything we stand for: embrace diversity (as complex
> adaptive systems principle), mutual understanding and critical thinking (as
> general scientific principle), use technology to make the world better, not
> for war (the same), and a light tone (good for everybody).
>
> Id say: go ahead with it!
>
> Sjoukje
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> Van: News and discussion about computer simulation in the social sciences
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> namens Chih-Chun Chen
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> Verzonden: zondag 15 november 2015 07:08
> Aan: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Onderwerp: Re: [SIMSOC] Statement on behalf of our community on the Paris
> attacks
>
> Dear Wander and all,
>
> I'm so glad that we as a scientific community are responding to these
> events. One thing I was wondering was whether we might also include the need
> for mutual understanding more explicitly in the statement.
>
> The most dangerous thing about us human beings isn't our eagerness to use
> violent means when we have strong beliefs but our tendency to believe
> strongly and uncritically that we are right and thus justified in imposing
> these beliefs on others by force. This is also what leads to us, through
> vilifying or maligning each other, to polarisation.
>
> As scientists, what distinguishes us is that we are able to critically
> examine all beliefs and positions, and to seek understand them. Tolerance
> based on an  understanding of how and why different people and peoples
> differ in their beliefs is far more valuable than tolerance based on a
> misunderstanding of these. So I was wondering if we might modify the text a
> little to reflect this idea, e.g.
>
> A flourishing global culture and functioning global society is built on
> mutual understanding, an eagerness to embrace diversity, and when values
> conflict, informed tolerance. The IS attacks on innocent citizens appear to
> be aimed at undermining this tolerant culture by fuelling a polarisation
> process, setting up groups of people against each other. Rather than
> responding with violence, leading to a spiralling down to a repressive
> state, as scientists we believe that we should support critical thinking in
> areas dominated by dogmatic and repressive powers. We prefer drones offering
> internet access over drones packed with with explosives. Better a
> bombardment with laptops than with rockets. Mind that lead is better used
> for printing than for bullets!
>
> Chih-Chun
>
> ---
> Research Associate, Complex Systems Scientist
> Engineering Design Centre, Department of Engineering
> University of Cambridge
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> http://abmcet.net/Chih-Chun_Chen/home.html
>
>
>
>
>
> Van: News and discussion about computer simulation in the social sciences
> [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] namens Jager, Wander
> [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
>
>
> Verzonden: zaterdag 14 november 2015 20:00
> Aan: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Onderwerp: [SIMSOC] Statement on behalf of our community on the Paris
> attacks
>
> Dear friends
>
> Usually we publish our ideas in scientific journals, but considering the
> impact of the terrorist attacks on innocent citizens on our society, the
> attack on Paris as the most recent gruesome act, I think that we, being
> scientists addressing the dynamics of society, have a responsibility to
> address the general public more directly. A polarisation of society,
> resulting in conflict, seems to be the aim of these fear-inducing attacks.
> The more society at large is aware of this likely aim, the more a liberal
> and tolerant culture might be resilient to such attacks.
>
> I propose publishing a statement on behalf of our scientific community. The
> following tekst is a sightly adapted post I made on Facebook. It might serve
> as a start for a joint message, which should have tolerance and openness as
> key values for a global culture to strive for.
>
> A flourishing global culture requires tolerance and the embracing of
> diversity as important principles. The IS attacks on innocent citizens
> appear to be aimed at undermining this tolerant culture by fuelling a
> polarisation process, setting up groups of people against each other. Rather
> than responding with violence, leading to a spiralling down to a repressive
> state, as scientists we believe that we should support critical thinking in
> areas dominated by dogmatic and repressive powers. We prefer drones offering
> internet access over drones packed with with explosives. Better a
> bombardment with laptops than with rockets. Mind that lead is better used
> for printing than for bullets!
>
> If you support this message just let me know, and if you have some
> suggestions for improving the tekst and for bringing this message out your
> input is valued very much.
>
> I hope to share a final tekst on Monday, which I want to circulate on this
> list.
>
> Warm regards from concerned citizen.
>
> Wander Jager
>
>
> --
> Groningen Center for Social Complexity Studies
> University College Groningen
> Phone +31 (0)6 361 84 622
> [X][X]
> Twitter: @GCSCS_RuG
> Facebook: Groningen Center for Social Complexity Studies
>
>