Terrorists, Freedom Fighters, and Aliens

The more difficult it is to understand particular beliefs, decisions, and actions, the more imperative it is we attempt to do so.  Society needs to be ever vigilant in its understanding if it hopes to prevent the future rise of bad ideas and bad behavior.  Shocking events should not simply be reacted to, but studied for the ideas and rational that gave rise to them.

We often respond to the horrible, the random, or the seemingly absurd with morbid fascination, sadness, or righteous indignation.  Take, for example, the recent slaughter of a British serviceman in the streets of South London in broad daylight by a vengeful muslim man.  When I saw the video posted on news sites of the blood soaked, knife wielding murderer moments after the killing, I felt rage and horrible sadness.  I wanted the man dead on the spot, with justice delivered swiftly and perfectly.  At the same time, I felt sadness for the woman who had to witness her partner butchered in the streets.  Finally, I was sickened by what seemed like an indifferent crowd witnessing the horror from a short distance away.

Our intense emotional responses to the horrific, unjust, or seemingly irrational are not unimportant (they point to truths about ourselves), but they often do a very affective job of shutting down all hope of understanding a particular idea or event.  If we are truly confident that our reactions are justified, that we are right and that the strange and shocking things of this world really are wrong; then we should quickly move past our initial emotional responses and try to understand, truly, how someone can think as they think or act as they do.  As offensive as the notion is to our pride; if we are to discover what is truly right and wrong, and if we strive to live in harmony with our own ideals, we must first attempt to place ourselves in the shoes of those we consider so different and so extreme.  

No, we need not empathize completely with terrorists, rapists, pedophiles, and the like.  We need not become like them to understand them.  But simple consideration of an offender's rational is an easy first step in determining whether or not an unwanted act could have been caused by factors beyond mere hatred or insanity.   We can all be certain that there lies a story behind every irrational, evil act, and that there are a myriad array of circumstances that led up to the offense in question.

The man who used a car and machete to kill an off-duty British soldier in London said he did what he did because the same kind of thing was happening to muslims in muslim countries (I'm paraphrasing).  The killer said his actions were "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth".  One of the killers aims, then, was to administer justice (as he defined justice).  Another reason why he murdered the British soldier was to call for the removal of foreign governments from muslim countries.

The man was caught literally red handed.  Guilt is not in question.  Nor is the nature of the brutal act.  Yet somehow the killer felt justified for what he did.  He blamed the foreign policy of Britain and its allies involved in the middle east for the death of the man whose blood still dripped from his knife.  A muslim cleric who knew the murderer also stated in an interview that responsibility for the soldier's death lay at the feet of the British government.

This rational to justify the killing of innocent people is certainly twisted.  The fact that an untold number of muslims likely think the same way is also highly disturbing.  But as I've already made clear in my long-winded preface to this subject, the degree to which we are disturbed by some strange belief or act is the degree to which we put our feelings behind us and dedicate ourselves to understanding the reasons and circumstances that led up to belief or act.

A few things we can easily understand:

• We will likely resent foreigners who invade our sovereign countries, our communities, and our homes.
• We will likely feel violent towards people who use violence against us.
• If a murderer was killed, or a rapist raped, or a thief stolen from, it would seem like perfect justice in a way.  "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" seems like a reasonable moral code, when its applied to cases in which there is no question who committed the crime.  
• We will likely take desperate, unconventional action to oppose an enemy that is far more powerful than we.  

So, let's create a hypothetical situation that illustrates these general rules/reactions.  

It has finally happened: Aliens have arrived. And, yes, they are invading. Their moon-sized Death Star and its fleet of battleships are docked just outside the Earth's atmosphere.  At first, the aliens use their limitless wealth to buy their way onto our land and into our government.  They immediately begin changing the way we do things:  our constitution, our religions, our ways of life-they are all brushed aside like meaningless things to make room for the more enlightened ways of the aliens.  Of course we all highly resent this forcible invasion, but most of us learn to live with it. What can we do against these death-ray wielding aliens?  Besides, maybe the aliens are right about not killing any living thing, or about providing an education to dolphins and chimpanzees, or about legalizing public sexual intercourse.  Some of us entertain these progressive ideas (some make more sense to us than others) but most of us just resent the newcomers.  Somewhere, somehow, there is conflict between human freedom fighters and alien forces.  The freedom fighters are wiped out, but their effort is considered heroic by the rest of us, and it inspires more humans to stand up and resist the alien imposition.  We look up to the human leaders who reassert the traditional belief of one god and the values of freedom and democracy.  The alien leaders are untouchable in their Death Star, so human leaders decide to strike out against the common alien here on earth in order to send the message, "aliens are not safe so long as they occupy our land and undermine our way of life."  Human freedom fighters justify their attack on the common alien by saying that we are only doing to the aliens what the aliens have already done to us.  

Now, does this hypothetical situation align perfectly with the western world/Islamic world conflict?  Absolutely not.  Are some of the comparisons potentially ridiculous or offensive?  Perhaps.  And finally, does this hypothetical situation provide the basis for justification of terrorist acts like we saw lately in the streets of London?  Clearly, no.  But it does humanize the Islamic struggle somewhat-it shows that you don't have to be crazy or evil to do terrible things.  Terrorists believe they're doing what's right-that they're fighting the good fight.  It's our responsibility to understand this, to point out our common ground, and then clearly and methodically illustrate how they are wrong.  This process should be the same for any shocking, absurd, and seemingly irrational belief/behavior.  In the next blog, I'll set out to extract the "wrong" from the beliefs of real-life fundamentalists and hypothetical "freedom fighters" alike.