Here we
go again, comments on Friday, November 13th, 2015
And now
we have the latest lashing out, the latest round of misguided young men,
enlisted by lunatics who may have sat in desert landscapes in a seemingly ancient
pace of life, allowing for the long contemplation of the western lifestyle,
indiscretions and trespasses. The task they have laid out for design, one also
of ancient practice: To scheme yet another effective surprise attack, to land
another blow in the endless string of human activity that is infliction and
temporary hurrah.
I had
the same reaction witnessing the twin tower collapse, that the adversaries had
taken time to arrive at the perfect plan to turn western technology upon
itself. My mind didn't immediately return to 2001 until the media immediately
did, so salivating for any excuse to do so of course.
But
missing, as usual, was any self-reflection. You see, forever as there have been
'sides' there has been justification for violence, likely much waxing and
beautiful winding rhetoric describing the 'just war.' And you see, there are
and have been someone called the 'other,' and man, undeniably solid in the camp
of territorial creatures, us and them have collided, and as the earth has
become more and more elevator-sized, our contact has become constant. And you
see, seldom does anyone explain that there are those who just can't operate as
we might see fit. Within our thoughts we assume great wisdom and we assume that
we are correct in our analysis, and it is even our responsibility to share the
light with the less-enlightened, the barbarians. But you know, there are others
who don't see it that way, and they are also alive, and if you quest to kill
them, they will forever seek retribution, and return action in kind. This is
what is called perpetual war.
But you
say: "What, you think you can talk to these people?"
We
occasionally pay heed to the scientific method, which clearly outlines the
phenomenon known as action and reaction, though somehow, despite the obvious
fact that we act upon the world, we seem to forget that there are reactions. It
becomes a matter of cluelessness: 'I didn't realize I was standing on your
foot, that if I dressed like your ancestor you would find it odd or insulting or
if I bombed your village and killed your extended family that you might get
very angry and dedicate your life to my demise.'
It is
likely simultaneously true that all men are essentially the same with
irreconcilable differences. We might call someone a religious extremist, a
person with certain attributes. What is it that they might do or not do for
which our justification for attempting to kill them comes easily? Undoubtedly,
an other is likely to have a mirrored list, calling us out.
Either
of us can stand on the apple box and declare: "You there have said and
done the deed worthy of our wrath." What have they said and done? What
have we said and done? Dare I suggest that a shift could occur in which from
this day forward, we will cease fire and simply just list the trespasses, and
compare them at a long table loaded with tea.
The
accounting would be difficult. "You killed my father, my son. You stole my
land, my resources. You said I was an infidel, an idiot. You said my stories
were myth, my practice primitive. You left me to rot in the desert,
penniless." And so on. And this animosity has gone on so long no one
remembers a world without it.
The
other might say: "I think I understand you, my people have studied hard
and we now know the injustice of our forefathers. We see and understand the
pattern of mankind's waves of strong invaders that have forever traipsed around
the globe attacking and plundering, and we see now that this was unfair. We are
even sorry, and to the heart bear the burden of our ancestors."
And
could we negotiate reparations and schedule peace?
One
might respond: "(But) You killed my father, my son. You stole my land, my
resources. You said I was an infidel, an idiot. You said my stories were myth,
my practice primitive. You showed up with bulldozers and building materials and
told me to keep moving, this desert was now useful to you."
But a
great-grand-child might say, should we persist with apology and with rifle
rusting at our feet: "I think I am prepared to accept your apology.
Perhaps you can repair our relationship. Perhaps you can help me, as I wish to
be helped, to better my life's condition." Or perhaps he might say
nothing. Or perhaps he might say: "We wish to live here in our ancient
land, in our ancient state, in our ancient method. We wish that you prevent
intervention, and keep your voices away, keep your gaseous incentives toward
your style, your insidious poisonous culture, in the jar."
And one
might respond: "But we are enlightened. We feel a little strange saying it
for our mothers no doubt suggested we maintain some humility, but we think we
know the correct way to live. In our weakest hour we may dream of numerous
nubile wives, but we really know this is not right. And we really think you
will enjoy our technology, and our markets can become open to your product. It
is true that we wrestle with prejudice, intolerance, xenophobia and class
warfare, but we have a formula for the proper way to look, speak, to engage our
institutions and product distribution centers and if you could just see them
you too could become wealthy and satisfied. We would celebrate your diverse
take on the 1/4" pounder and 'Married with children.' We know it may take
time for you to fully understand 'Glee' or 'Lady Gaga.'"
Of course,
none of this addresses two major areas restricting us here in the enlightened
domains: Fear and the possession of (currently) the biggest guns. We are
outraged, those (I'm sorry) relatively few of our own torn to pieces in these
massacres are mostly innocent, their friends and relatives forever burdened by
their losses no doubt. And we are sure the enemy is an enemy, that they are
ready, that they are coming. And we are sure our soldiers and our weapons are
superior; we best just take care of the problem. We are the types to get stuff
done.
But the
question remains: Can we EVER follow any course besides responding to massacres
with massacres? Clearly it is the path of least resistance to respond in kind
and then some, for to simply make a graphic, and unflinching report of a
violent act without return fire is purely egghead weakness, emboldens the
adversary to strike the wimp again, one who will just stand there bleeding. We
shall forever have the biggest gun, and the elimination of our enemies, and further
their smallest embers, must be just beyond that next hill and we will take it.
As efficient as Hitler's solution may have been, it did not bring about its
aim. We claim that we are not engaged in such unspeakable quest; we are
helping, like wise men bearing gifts, the gifts of assimilation into our way.
But the gifts need be received or our generosity and good humor may fade.
Can we
ever follow any course besides responding to massacres with massacres? Are the
massacres on our territory odd or even? I said the accounting would be
difficult. It does seem to be the case, that it will be difficult to refrain
from endless carnage and retribution, if we can't even acknowledge that we are
engaged in it. If you say: "Why do they hate us?" you are assuredly
missing any speck of self-reflection, and missing, I would contend, a major
component in enlightenment. So it's at least best not to refer to yourself as
enlightened.
gibbs
chapman
November
2015