| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Harry Hope" |
| Date: |
05 Aug 2006 08:03:14 AM |
| Object: |
Dehumanizing others is no virtue |
From The Chicago Sun-Times, 8/4/06:
http://www.suntimes.com/output/greeley/cst-edt-greel04.html
Dehumanizing others is no virtue
August 4, 2006
BY ANDREW GREELEY
To hate other humans or to feel no pain at their suffering, it is
necessary to dehumanize them, to write them off as less than human.
The Nazis are the classic example of this dehumanization.
Germans were the obermensch, the master race.
Jews, Slavs, Gypsies were the untermensch, the inferior peoples who
barely had the right to exist.
The Puritans dehumanized Native Americans, white Americans dehumanized
African Americans, Irish Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland
dehumanized one another, as do Jews and Arabs in the Mideast, and
Shiite and Sunni Muslims.
In every case, one attributes to the "other" characteristics that
prove that they are not fully human by the use of stereotypes --
"illegals," for example.
The American soldiers who tortured, beat, raped and murdered Iraqis
dismiss their victims as "rag heads."
The rest of us are able to ignore the pain and the grief of ordinary
Iraqis, as I learned from responses to my last column, by arguing that
Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attack or that Saddam Hussein killed
far more than have died under our inept and unplanned "occupation."
The first argument is ignorant.
Bush administration officials have admitted in whispers that no
evidence has been found of a link between al-Qaida and Iraq.
It is also immoral because it assumes that revenge is appropriate.
The second argument reveals twisted immorality.
Because Saddam was a mass murderer, Americans are not responsible for
our failure to protect Iraqis when we have taken charge of their
country.
He was worse than we are, he killed through commission, we kill (for
the most part) through omission.
Our only sins were to make war on the basis of false arguments with
little understanding of the people whose social system we destroyed
and to establish an occupation of arrogant incompetence.
Thus the ineffable Paul Wolfowitz, the intellectual architect of the
Iraq war, could say, "I think that there are ethnic differences in
Iraq, but they are exaggerated."
Right!
The Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites will be too busy celebrating our
liberation to kill one another.
It is unlikely that Wolfowitz assumes any responsibility for what went
wrong.
So you see, the e-mail that makes this argument implies, why should we
feel any guilt because Saddam was much worse than we are?
Baldly stated, that argument is nonsense and immoral nonsense at that.
Yet many Americans are still ready to use it to wash their hands of
the pain and suffering, the fear and the horror of innocent Iraqis we
have betrayed.
Joel Preston Smith, one of my e-mail commentators, writes he was in
Iraq before the war and after it began.
"If I hadn't been treated so well, maybe I wouldn't feel so connected
to the families and friends who sheltered me, fed me, helped me do my
work. But I see the vast majority of Iraqis as incredibly kind,
thoughtful people. And it is a knife in my heart, every day, to see
them suffer."
Many Americans do feel a similar knife, but many others dispense
themselves from any feelings of grief or responsibility.
Moreover, when Americans finally "cut and run" -- as Ronald Reagan did
in Lebanon -- there is no reason to think that Baathist leaders of the
insurgency (from the safe haven of Syria) will not re-install Saddam
or someone as bad as he was.
The man who was to lead the military police contingent into Iraq was
promised 20 battalions of MPs.
At the last minute, to prove Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's point
that not many troops would be needed to dispose of Saddam, his
contingent was cut to three battalions.
If he had his full complement, he might have been able to prevent the
looting that provided weapons for the insurgency.
Rumsfeld dismissed the looting as something that was inevitable and
not important.
"Stuff happens."
Are all Americans responsible for the administration's ignorance and
arrogance in Iraq?
Surely not.
Yet those who still defend the war with clichés and phony arguments
despite all the published evidence to the contrary are whistling in
the dark as they pass the graveyard.
______________________________________________________
"This has been going on since the dawn of time. We convince ourselves
that the enemy is somehow less than human, does not value life the way
we do or share any of our common values. This enables us to
rationalize and justify the terrible things we do to our enemies such
as kill and torture them."
David Weddle
Harry
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
An Overrated Virtue - No Justification for Palestinian Murderers
Virtue Not Materialism Should Be Government Goal
President Know-Nothing: The Bush culture makes a universal virtue of ignorance
Re: Is lack of honor a Christian virtue?
Republican Darrell Issa, California recaller, governor wannabe: Killer of Virtue.
Paying Tribute to Liberal Virtue
How NOT to promote Virtue and the Respect for Law
Virtue and Virtuous Men will Bring Peace to Iraq and the Middle East
| World Trade Center 7 Imploded by Silverstein, FDNY and Others
"Dangerous Habits Characteristics That Are Destructive To One's Self And To Others" 5-21-94
Mitt Romney supports the war but Dodged Draft, his sons never served either, but will use others as cannon fodder.
John Negroponte, Porter Goss, The Generals, Senate Republicans And Others Must Be Faithful To Their Oaths Of Office, And Not Break The Laws And Violate The Constitution Just Because President Bush Tells Them It Is Legal To Do So
U.S. helicopter destroyed, 9 others damaged by mortar fire in Iraq
Georgie Bush will, once again, leave his messes for others to clean up
North Korea, Others to Build New Mini-Nukes as Well?
|
|
|
