When Silence Explodes
This post was submitted by Tyrone Hanley, who defines "terrorism" and our relationship and responsibilities to the word in a time of political, social, and religious unrest.
I believe ANY act of violence for political, religious, or any other cause is an act of terrorism. Using this broad definition of what constitutes terrorism, I believe America is a terrorist state. Imagine “Shock and Awe”, torture, and imprisoning people indefinitely being committed by our own citizens.
America at-large does not agree with my definition of terrorism, but rather we have been told that terrorism is a violent act on innocent civilians by crazy, radical, and/or religious fundamentalist evildoers. This limited definition cuts the conversation dangerously short. It silences those who have or are willing to commit that type of violence by making them out to be crazy religious whack jobs with no valid grievances with the world. So much goes unsaid and unheard and I want to encourage people to participate in a deeper dialogue on the subject.
I do not think happy and respected people tend to blow themselves or others up. Is it not possible that terrorism can be a loud cry to be heard by the voiceless or disenfranchised in a globalized and capitalistic world that wishes them to be quiet and submissive? Acts of violence against the world powers (i.e. USA, Israel, and Europe) while not humanitarian in action, viciously express human emotions and desires. They rage against the machine. It is similar to the queer student who after constant bullying explodes in verbal and/or physical attacks against their tormentors.
Let me be clear. I oppose all acts of violence. Just as I find forcing a plane into a building morally wrong, I oppose US military attacks that kill countless civilians, as well as economic polices and structures that lead to the death and misery of many throughout the world. As a believer in peace, I cannot be against one act of violence and not another. Though I find the actions of those who strap bombs to their bodies or drive vehicles filled with explosives into public spaces deplorable, I feel the motivations for their actions are worthy of examination and address. We should work to understand what brings someone to carry out such an act of cruelty, despair, and dare I say hope.
I believe their actions are connected to political and economic systems and structures, social injustice, and inequality. The point is that we as a nation are not having a dialogue about their motivations. We say they are “crazy” and “hate freedom,” and call it a day. Meanwhile, the forces that push human beings to kill other human beings go untouched. Ignoring a problem does not make it go away, but only exacerbates it.
If Americans want to help end terrorism, we must understand that our actions impact people around the world, and some (or many) of them hurt and anger people. We have to acknowledge that our government and corporations have also committed and contributed to acts of terrorism and we will not eradicate terrorism if we continue to engage in such acts. We cannot always think we are “the good guys.” We must own up to our shit. This is what mature and responsible people and nations do. We must speak out and take action. Otherwise, as history has shown us, the silence will explode.
4 comments:
“I believe ANY act of violence for political, religious, or any other cause is an act of terrorism.”
What about self defense? We're never going to live in a world where everyone is a pacifist, however desirable that may be.
“This limited definition cuts the conversation dangerously short. It silences those who have or are willing to commit that type of violence by making them out to be crazy religious whack jobs with no valid grievances with the world.”
Okay, why shouldn't these people be silenced? In my opinion, groups of people who are willing to kill innocent strangers to make a political statement have given up their place at the table with the grownups.
Well, I could sit here and pick this apart a lot more, but the long story short is that you haven't offered any sort of cohesive view of what exactly America as a country is doing wrong that causes these attacks. You are careful to say that you condemn the attacks, but your attitude seems to be that America is doing things to deserve them.
You're correct that it's an oversimplification to call Islamic extremists a bunch of cooky religious whack jobs. It's an oversimplification, but's it oversimplifying something that's basically true. They're not down with female equality, they're not so cool with the fact that we're not executing sodomites, they despise American pop culture, and they don't like the fact that it's leaking over into their own culture. Probably a lot of them will only be satisfied if the whole world adopted Sharia law.
These are grievances which they're just gonna have to fucking deal with. Are there elements of American foreign policy (particularly in the Middle East) which anger them? Yes. Are these nonetheless prudent measures for us as a country to take? I don't know. Probably a mixed bag here - how big of a fan of Israel are you?
"...we have been told that terrorism is a violent act on innocent civilians by crazy, radical, and/or religious fundamentalist evildoers."
I would add middle-eastern to that list. Funny how Americans think only dark complected middle-eastern men are terrorists.
American has a rich history of terrorism. Remember the Ku Klux Klan, the Weathermen, the Symbionese Liberation Army, the Army of God, Operation Rescue, Randall Terry, Fred Phelps, Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols and the Unibomber?
To mention just a few.
Thanks Tyrone, this is a very good post. You're right. We're not having a dialogue about terrorism in this country. Then again it might not matter - America's best years are behind us. The USA is "over" and one of the reasons is we cannot engage each other openly, honestly and respectfully about anything. A discussion is not a volley of attack and counterattack. So, issues like terrorism continue to go unaddressed.
I really like this post. A deeper dialogue needs to happen. I would recommend reading "imperial hubris" by michael scheuer, which details american foreign policy in the middle east and the horrendous, irresponsible invasion of afghanistan. he also writes about america's policy to dehumanize islamic extremists. you know, as soon as we see them as "the other", then we can easily create a straw-man argument out of their grievances. for example, the bush administration constantly espouses that they attack us for what we ARE, and not what we DO. thus, they hate freedom, civil liberties, and pluralism. i think that aidan is kind of falling into this trap:
"You're correct that it's an oversimplification to call Islamic extremists a bunch of cooky religious whack jobs. It's an oversimplification, but's it oversimplifying something that's basically true. They're not down with female equality, they're not so cool with the fact that we're not executing sodomites, they despise American pop culture, and they don't like the fact that it's leaking over into their own culture."
...its more than just leaking over into their culture. its being forced upon them. and what aidan doesn't seem to realize is that america is DOING a lot wrong. and its these actions that are fueling their hatred; not the fact that we are more tolerant of homosexuality and have equal rights for women.
Tyrone, the only thing that you might want to watch out for is to see suicide bombers as despairing. it may seem small, but scheuer explains how important this act is when viewed under the context of a defensive jihad. part of the "otherness" factor is to see this act as despairing, when really it is kind of liberating.
again, this is a really cool post. and i hope that i don’t sound arrogant in this reply. im not an expert at all. really i’ve only read about three books and taken a class on this subject. so i could easily be wrong.
Post a Comment