Brother Albert Chmielowski dies on this day at age 71.

Albert Chmielowski, a Polish painter whose concern for the poor lead him to become a Franciscan monk died at age 71.

Chmielowski was born to a wealthy family and studied agriculture in order to step into the role of managing his family's estates.  Drawn to politics he joined in the Polish uprising of 1863 in which he lost a leg.  Following the Polish defeat he relocated to Belgium where he developed an interest in painting.  In 1874 he returned to Kraków, Poland where his interest in politics and the poor ultimately lead him into the Franciscan order in 1887.  By that time his identification with the poor had already lead him to a voluntary life of poverty.  He founded the Brothers of the Third Order of Saint Francis, Servants of the Poor in 1891.

Rushing to favorite conclusions and arguments: Terrorist strike in Florida

It's interesting, and a bit sad, that after any one particular type of act masses of people, from political commentators, to news article "comment" posters, rush to arguments they like to make as if they are really relevant to the issue at hand.

We're in a long term, mostly urban, domestic guerilla war being waged by a mostly foreign enemy but one that does have fighters on our own soil.  We haven't, as a society, ever dealt with a war of this type really.  The last Western nation to do so was France, in Algeria when it fought the FLN in Algeria, including Algiers, and in France itself.  In a war of this type, individuals and groups of individuals can and will strike on an almost entirely random basis.  But strike they will.

Some of these terrorists are weak minded and unhinged. Not all are. But some certainly are. And of those, some will act fully independently in a way that we cannot not only not predict, but, added to that, in ways that aren't even predictable to those whose campaigns these people adopt.

It can't be fully said that these people would not act in this fashion but for the guerilla war.  But that can at least partially be said.  And again, not all are weak minded. For the weak minded and mentally ill, the war gives them something to focus on and define themselves by.  Not every radical during the Russian Revolution had thought out Socialism.  Plenty of the German street fighters for the Nazis prior to 1932 who joined the SA hadn't delved into Nazism deeply.  There's no reason to believe that Muslim terrorists, foreign or domestic, have really struggled with their consciences and determined to act out of deep conviction.  Probably plenty of them were angry or confused young men, and women, prior to defining their anger by jihad.

Still, we should not discount that some have done just that. Islam does have dark passages that do indeed call for violence against the infidel and tens of thousands of young Muslims, some converts, have answered the black flag of ISIL. And ISIL is calling for its adherents to strike here.

Under these circumstances the instant argument on gun control that immediately comes up is really misplaced.  Firearms technology, in real terms, has changed very little since the 192s really and automatically cycling weapons have been available since just after 1900.  Handgun technology was perfected around 1911 and hasn't really changed at all since that time.  What has changed is that we're at war with a domestic enemy on our own soils.  And what has also changed is that we have a large number of mostly young men whom we've sidelined in our new computer driven technological world, with that world being one in which all morals are treated as simply being personal choices. We dealt with this in depth in our thread (once one of the most read here) Peculiarized violence and American society. Looking at root causes, and not instrumentalities.  And we also dealt with the very topic we're now addressing in this thread in our also once highly read Playing Games with Names and Burying Heads in the Sand. Mischaracterizing violence and ignoring its nature at the same time.

It isn't as if, however, pundits, politicians, and commentators of all types are going to come here and read this and be convinced of anything, however.  But mark my words, sadly, all the debate on this topic is darned near pointless.  Restriction and police action did nothing whatsoever to stop the FLN's campaign for Algerian independence.  Only Algerian independence did, although a counter terrorism campaign featuring terrorism itself darned near achieved the opposite result, before the French public became disgusted with it (I'm not suggesting here we adopt such tactics).  Control of various types did not prevent this same thing from happening in Brussels and Paris.  What will stop it is the defeat of ISIL, which is actually occurring. But that's a long term effort.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Related Threads:

Peculiarized violence and American society. Looking at root causes, and not instrumentalities.

Playing Games with Names and Burying Heads in the Sand. Mischaracterizing violence and ignoring its nature at the same time.

The Casper Daily Press for April 6, 1916

This evening issue is inserted here not for what is on the front  page, but for what isn't.

For the first time since the Columbus Raid, the Punitive Expedition didn't make the front page for the Casper Daily Press.

And meanwhile, in the current war. . .

I haven't been posting in a long while on the war on ISIL, but it's hard to ignore this week, as ISIL struck Brussels.

Once again, people seem surprised.  I don't know why they'd be surprised.  Brussels is a major European capital and in some ways is the Capital of Europe.  To the deluded eye of ISIL, Brussels is a seat of power of the Crusader Empire they imagine to be hounding them, and which they wish to conquer, rather than a sad secular reminder of what Europe once was (which they'd still wish to conquer).

There will be more of this.  This certainly isn't the last ISIL attack on an European city, and for that matter an attack of some sort on a US one is only a matter of time. Just after the news of the attack on Brussels came news that ISIL had sent out about 400 operatives into the West to conduct such affairs.  Now, that's a high number, but only a fraction of them will ever do anything. Still, that number is enough so that some, I'd guess about 10%, will try something.

Brussels may have been particularly prone to this, it should be noted, as pre attack commentators noted that it has not been successful, as much of Europe has not been, in integrating its Islamic residents. This is a huge difference between the US and Canada as compared to Europe.  Europe does let in immigrants (although, the recent refugee crisis aside, not anywhere near the rate the US does), but European societies generally do not "melt".  Indeed, for Americans and Canadians one of the really shocking aspects of European culture is that they do not.  It's probably an example of Holscher's Third Law of History, but while the cultures change (less than imagined) over time, they stick.  So immigrant cultures in Europe tend to end up immigrant islands, where as that tends to last only a generation in North America.

That doesn't mean that some Islamic immigrants do not secularize.  They do, but that also ends up putting the same societies in danger.  I haven't seen anything about it in this instance, but it is notable that in the Paris attacks the attackers decried the "apostates", i.e., those of Islamic culture who have not stayed traditionally strict in their observance of their faith (although in many parts of the globe even Islamic societies aren't particularly strict in their observance).  So, an attack on Brussels was pretty predictable.

Even as this comes, however, ISIL's fortunes are declining in the Middle East and much more rapidly than I would have guessed.  In Syria, the Syrian government is clearly going to win and is retaking lost ground fairly rapidly.  ISIL's days in Syria are numbered, and for that matter the entire rebellion there is on the decline.  This is largely due to Russian assistance, which perhaps shows the degree to which Russia correctly read the entire situation.  ISIL will likely be without territory in Syria fairly soon.

Also in Iraq, however, has the tide been seen to turn, albeit slowly.  The current Iraqi government, amazingly, seems to have gotten its military act together, but with a huge amount of American military assistance.  The news broke this week that the number of US troops in Iraq is in fact much larger than previously estimated.  So, giving credit where credit is due, the Obama Administration seems to have quietly read the situation correctly and this is leading to the slow victory in Iraq.

What a defeat in Iraq will mean for ISIL isn't completely clear.  Will it go underground?  Or will it simply disappear? Al Queda remains around, but it's a mere shadow of its former self.  Perhaps we have more reason to be optimistic than we could have previously hoped.

On that, a person has to wonder if the Kurds are optimistic.  The Kurds have been an ironic beneficiary of the war on ISIL as they always had their act together and managed to hold on to their ground in both Syria and Iraq.  In Syria, they've now declared their region to be a federal region, which doesn't mean that the Syrian government is going to view it that way, or that the Turks will like that either.