I admit, I usually prefer to keep this a place of creativity before politics (mostly because its probably painfully obvious where I stand), but on occasion I feel the need to rant about current events, and this is one of those times. Bear with me please.
The recent "announcement" of Osama (Usama) Bin Laden's death comes as a continual reminder of the problem of scale within our modern society. Of course, the US populace's first reaction is one of flag-waving celebration. This I can understand, although it seems rather jingoistic and somewhat empty to me. Of course much of the country is relieved to find him dead - he did take credit for the most heinous attack on US soil in decades. But what perturbs me to no end are the implications surround the entire course of events.
In destroying Bin Laden, we've succeeded in what exactly? Killing the figurehead of terrorism across the world? In a biblical "eye for an eye" sense, I can certainly understand the adulation, but what has this accomplished in reality? The war on terror has, in essence, been a war on iconography - on symbolism. A war against ideology has a limited means of success from its very inception. This war may have been one of the Bush Regime's biggest successes. How can you win a war which can never be won? How can you kill an idea? I honestly wonder that if Bin Laden hadn't been ill - possibly dying already, as some sources report - if his reign of terror wouldn't have continued indefinitely.
Now, I'm not trying to drum up ire against the US government here. They can do that excessively well on their own. What I am concerned about are the underlying misconceptions, as well as what the magic mirror of self-examination mentions about our ideological battles. Sure, Bin Laden's dead, the head of Al Qaeda is no more. But what does that mean to us? An icon is dead. Unfortunately, icons have an annoying little habit of becoming martyrs to their causes. When the man dies, though, he doesn't take his ideas with him. Fanaticism is like a hydra - when you cut off its head, typically, it just smirks and sticks another head in your face.
But the underlying theme isn't "terrorism will live forever," because that's a given. As long as their are ideas, there will be counter-ideas, in lesser and greater extremes. The real issue is how did our world become so polarized? How did the United States alienate the fringes of one of the largest religious groups in the world? We're missing the larger image here.
The US has made a habit of stepping on, making shady backroom deals with, and installing politically friendly, if unpopular, leaders in countries where we see opportunities for resources. This is the nasty side of world diplomacy. It makes sense from a Machiavellian point of view. But while we were turning a lauded "freedom fighter" against Soviet forces into "Public Enemy Number One"; while we were supporting regimes who oppressed their peoples' democratic rights, but bowed before the almighty United States (or at least its money); while global corporations were exploiting the underdeveloped resources of impoverished nations - with a blinded US eye; the kindling of frustration erupted into an inferno of resistance. Our iron-fisted "diplomacy" poked the serpents nest and rather than diffusing the situation, we ignored it, or worse:
I try not this cynical, but sometimes I wonder if we didn't welcome it. I wonder, because this burgeoning terrorist network prompted several wars, helped keep US citizens distracted from their problems and focused bigotry into a sharply tuned Islamic point. And once again, much of the US populace missed that fact. We wanted the quick fix. We wanted to punish a previously US supported dictator for non-existent weapons of mass destruction. We wanted to trounce a regime which we once fed with arms and support against the Russians. Suddenly, taking out our former ally, Bin Laden, would solve all our problems - the little anti-terrorist anti-depressant which would make everything better.
We once again missed the forest for a few scraggly trees.
We continually fail to recognize the simple similarities to a childhood idiom - do unto others as you'd have done to you. Now, I'm not a bald-faced idealist like I once was. I recognize that there probably have always, and likely will always be conflict in our world. But if, for once, we acted to support developing nations, rather than taking advantage of their neediness and instability, perhaps we could bolster trust, rather than animosity. If rather than bullying people for resources, we helped them develop them in a non-invasive and ecologically viable fashion, maybe they'd be more likely to see us as thugs and more apt to call us allies. Perhaps if we didn't let our own one dimensional caricatures of other cultures and ideologies shadow our common sense, we could start to really view the world less as potential threats and more as potential cohorts.
Yeah, I know, I really do sound idealistic. But maybe for once we should let a different kind of mindset out in public. It's the 21st motherfucking century for fucks sake! Our planet's running out of space and resources. Our atmosphere may well be artificially warming. Its time we shook off the blinders and understood that killing a terrorist figurehead won't end our problems; that drilling for more oil won't make us economically more viable for much longer; that we're heading for important, potentially world-rending decisions in our lifetime. Its time to stop dicking around with quick fixes and trying to understand - much less solve - the real issues of our times.
Thanks for indulging me. I needed to get that off my chest.
No comments:
Post a Comment