>Does that mean that you accept the validity of my argument, and only
>stipulate that it be applied to me as well?
Your argument that the way they understand and interpret the world is merely a simplistic projection of their personal experiences is attractive to me in a general sense, because (consistent with your theory) it fits with things I have experienced.
The first time I noticed this phenomenon (people say I'm a bit slow) would be when I was barely in my teens. Another kid and myself were comparing stamp albums and negotiating a barter when, for no apparent reason the other kid accused me of attempting to steal some of the stamps from his album. The accusation amazed me, I couldn't conceive what could have aroused the suspicion. Then a few minutes later I happened to notice him trying to do the exact thing he had just accused me of. I still remember the circumstances, his distracted me by saying I had dropped something, but when I looked back up I say him trying to take something from my book. I was speechless.
A few seconds later, it dawned on me that he must earlier have been projecting his own dishonest intentions. A sly thief himself, he tended to assume everyone else was too. Since then I have observed that a person's beliefs about other people's intentions is very often a reliable indicator of his own intentions.
Your argument, that these people are projecting their own experiences and motivations is consistent with that observation of human nature.
> Honestly, I do not see why my
>views are being brought to the picture - I never advocated the destruction
>of the "liberal Western decadence" let alone joining any gangs attempting to
>do it by force.
You misinterpret me. I was suggesting that your own understanding of what motivates people is just as likely to be a projection of what motivates yourself. For instance you suggested that these people might be motivated more by a desire to overcome a sense of sexual inadequacy, than any political grievance. Or something along those lines anyhow. In the absence of any evidence that these men actually suffered from any such sense of inadequacy, the explanation seems quite wild and speculative. I can't help wondering if you may not be projecting your own personal experience.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas