Yes We Are Them and They Are Us
I had a philosophy professor in college who described human savagery, and grace, and everything in between, by using the metaphor of a dial. He suggested that a couple of circumstantial clicks in one direction or another can render any human capable of luminous compassion, or obscene cruelty. What matters, he said, is recognition of ourselves in others, even -- in fact especially -- in others who do terrible things.
His point was that there is no 'them', only 'us'. We are all capable of anything, and the moral universe does not have roped-off VIP sections where only good people are allowed. He confronted us with the idea that there is only one kind of human being, and it's therefore perilous to assign less capacity for redemption to others, than we hope for ourselves. In fact, he continued, the impulse to separate along rigid moral lines is the very thing that leads to gas chambers, inquisitions, and suicide bombings. He asked whether, if we acknowledged our own capacity for cruelty, we'd be more or less inclined to act upon it under duress. I remember the way he turned the metaphorical dial with his hand, suggesting that just because we feel exalted by Good, we should not deny the dark thrill of so-called 'Evil'.
He finished that memorable lecture with what I still consider to be a profound moral assertion, that neither darkness nor light, both of which we all carry, exempts us from capacity for the other.
I miss my professor's metaphorical dial these days, because I think it might help elevate the debate over President Obama's recent decision not to release the photos and video of American military and civilian personnel doing hideous things to their fellow humans at Abu Ghraib and other less infamous prisons.
Instead of a dial, the loudest on all sides seem to have embraced a much cruder vertical metaphor: with 'us' at the top of a radiant ladder of virtue, and 'them' at the bottom of a dark pit of corruption. The Left brays highfalutin outrage at President Obama for his 'capitulation', 'hypocrisy', 'pandering', and 'abandonment' of the very values that 'we' are supposed to stand for. And the Right honks with equal certainty that 'our' morality is unsullied by these sins, since 'we' don't like having to commit them, and only do so because 'they', our evil enemies, force our hands.
I suggest that until both sides have the courage to recognize themselves in each other, and in those terrible pictures, the debate is useless. People on the Left are just as capable of rationalizing cruelty as people on the Right. The only difference, at the moment, is that after eight years of decisions based on a particularly questionable set of moral absolutes, the Right's assertions are flimsier than the Left's.
To even begin a fair consideration of President Obama's decisions, both sides need to step off their pedestals and first examine the inconvenient notion of consequences. The question of what will happen to Americans in uniform throughout the world, if the classified images of torture are released now is not unreasonable just because it's being asked more often by conservatives. Nor is it proof of capitulation that the President has stepped back from a promise to release this material, since the truth is that anyone with an internet connection can find previously unseen horrors online right now, courtesy (most recently) of the Sydney Morning Herald. It is a very good bet that horrifying pictures will keep coming, and the story of our extended visit(s) to the dark side will continue to be told, whether or not President Obama gives an order now, later, or not at all. Meanwhile he does have an urgent obligation to protect our men and women in uniform, almost all of whom are as appalled by what happened at Abu Ghraib as the civilians they are sworn to protect. And yes there is also the politics of the moment, which again appears to have resulted in Obama doing what he's done throughout his career, creating space for compromise, on his terms, with people whose cooperation he needs.
I am hopeful that Barack Obama recognizes the humanity of even the grinning torturers in the recently revealed pictures from Abu Ghraib. If he does, it will help him make the right decisions regarding the wretched mess the previous administration dumped in his lap. And I am hopeful that he recognizes his own ruthlessness, and affinity for power in, say, Dick Cheney. If he does, it might help him understand what not to do, if he really means to leave a legacy of renewal and hope. And I am hopeful that he recognizes his own vanity and economical relationship with the truth, in, say, Bill Clinton, who squandered so much of his promise by never admitting, to himself or anyone else, how unbelievably full of shit he could be.
More troubling than his current maneuvers, is Obama's unwillingness to rescind the expanded presidential powers captured by Dick Cheney and his operatives and then approved by frightened legislators of both parties, over the last eight years. Troubling, but not surprising. Who among us would spend one minute of our first term in elected office figuring out ways to reduce our own power? Anyone that quickly answers, "I would!" hasn't thought it all the way through, or wouldn't really want the job. This president will not find it easy to give back the new powers that his predecessors left behind, even if he knows he should. After all, 'they' were using them to do the wrong things, while 'we' aren't like that at all.
Yes 'We' Are! It's not as catchy as Yes We Can, but it's just as true.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The topic hits the nail on the head. Americans, on both sides of the political divide are self-righteous to their own determent.
Remember when nearly all of Europe led by France and Germany begged us not to go into Iraq. Americans of all political persuasions, made fun of the French (renaming french fries) and lecturing the Germans about confronting Nazism. This of course is a repetition of the Vietnam war. On Mid-East policy, there is more division among the Israelis than among Americans.
Our two political parties have become "the Incumbent Party". A third party presidential candidate has not stood a chance, even though history has vindicated their policies - e.g. Perot and NAFTA. The left-right similarity has poorly served us on foreign policy, economic and domestic fronts.
Even with everything politicized, our thinkers / news commentators only find superficial issues to distinguish the 'us' from 'them', while both sides blunder through the debate.
True that the major parties yield the same results, but not because they behave the same. Republicans fail by being too rigid, and Democrats fail by being too accommodating.
Would you be willing to change the system to allow third parties a chance, e.g., proportional representation?
It is quite insulting to suggest that all who criticize Obama's idiocy are rigid ideologues. Practical consequences are very much the basis of objection for many of us. This was a lost opportunity to rebrand America as a nation that can be trusted to hold true to it's professed ideals. Every time Obama continues a Bushian foreign policy, whether hiding abuse, or military tribunals, or airstrikes in Afghanistan, he lends moral support to the enemy, endangering troops and civilians far more than photos of abuse everyone knows happened, and wasn't even on his watch. He and his apologists claim he is taking a more nuanced position, but even if that were true, nuance is so very easily lost in translation.
I read this and not just one time it was a great read and did very well in pointing out the pit-falls nevertheless it did not push for returning the prez office to a trusted one... it only said we should understand that we all have a darkside, of which I concur... however I would not have been upset if Obama only went back on his word to let the photos out... it is all his lies added on top of that one that strained this camel's back. The only way to control our darkside is to shine light on it. Most of all the Retaricans must be called out and shown for what they are if not they will only grow in their evilness when they are protected from facing the truth of how evil they are. Just look at their post here do you see any accepting of reasonability? In Germany after WWI America lead the way to not call out the evil Germany did in that war (Obama is making the same mistake now) so 20 years later we had to face WWII and a greater evil... after that war we called out the German evilness and now for 60 years we have had peace and a good Germany. YES I'M BETTER THAN RETARICANS AND THOSE WHO PROTECT THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rick’s Place, Head On Radio Network
This is the type of post that keeps me coming back to the HP. It is a relief to hear that a few others understand that evil is not all in other people. Unfortunately, based on the number of replies, it looks like this is not a very popular topic. The most replies appear to be for the blogs that are most critical of others. Hate sells better, on both sides of the aisle.
Moral equivalency is a wonderful cop-out on taking a principled stand.
"People on the Left are just as capable of rationalizing cruelty as people on the Right."
And you are apparently incapable of distinguishing opposition to torture from support for torture, i.e., good from evil. Torture is absolutely wrong, destroying the very values it purports to protect, and must be completely exposed. A society that claims that torture "protects the troops" but the exposure of torture "threatens the troops" is a society that has deliberately damned itself.
the U.S. govt. DOES NOT TORTURE !!! ( Caucasians)
As Jesse Ventura pointed out the US has "only" tortured muslims making this have a racist and bigoted dimension.
It is well and good that we all at times take a step back and realise yes we all can commit heinous acts at the wrong time and moment maybe but that is no excuse not to stand up for what one believes to be correct and moral and those grinning torturers may be human but they acted in an in humane way and should be judged and sentenced for it. Nice to be generous but in your generosity do not be guilty of situational morality which this article seems to dangerously suggest.
Recognizing the evil within ourselves and making our battle with it our first priority seems like a wise course of action to me too.
What puts our soldiers in danger even more than torture photos is the practice of flying armed drones and indiscriminately bombing so that we may kill 5 terrorists along with 30 or more innocents. Shock and Awe, lying the nation into a war is what put the soldiers, rationalizing remaining in these countries as an occupying force puts our soldiers in danger. Yet....we did and do all of those things without batting an eye as to what the consequences would be for our men and women serving in our forces.
You should watch the documentary called "War Made Easy - How Presidents and Pundits Are Spinning Us To Death". Did you know that in WWI the civilian casualty rate was only 10% but in each successive war the rate of civilian casualties has exploded. In WWII it was 50%, Vietnam 70%. The Iraq War the civilian casualty rate is 90%. Maybe that's why "they hate us".
The torture photos can't hold a candle to the fact in both Iraq and Afghanistan the civilians have born the brunt of destruction and annihilation of our illegal invasion/occupation. We've killed and displaced more people than Sadaam Hussein could have if he lived to be 90.
You want to know why Obama hasn't given up the executive power Cheney grabbed? Human nature. That's why we have to take Obama on where torture and other human rights issues are concerned. It's so much harder to get something back after you've already given it away.
The school yard bully is usually a hunter and abuser of animals. They are a special breed and are called Sadists. Sadists were used by Hitler in his feared Death Brigades. They tortured and murdered men,women,and children. Fortunately most people are not like them. But some will go along with the program of Sadists in order to further their careers. They are guilty of unbridled greed.
"He confronted us with the idea that there is only one kind of human being..."
Then you were confronted with a fallacy.
If what constitutes a human being in our reality was an absolute, it might be true. But human beings are biological creatures at the mercy of all forms of developmental and physiological happenstance.
Some human beings are born deficient of the mental faculties to even maintain their own survival, to say nothing of being trusted to roam freely or being held legally and morally responsible for their actions.
Just as some human beings are born void of any emotional faculty required to experience empathy, even if fully competent in their cognitive ability, and to say nothing about those who are deprived of their ability to empathize developmentally or through abuse.
Sociopaths and sexual sadists are not only incapable of experiencing empathy, they act in ways and for reasons which make it impossible for normal humans to empathize with them. Just as no human can truly empathize with a predatory animal that has no conscience and feels no remorse.
It makes for fun, pithy word play to pretend that all humans are one thing, but evidence to the contrary has existed throughout the entire history that philosophy has enjoyed playing that game. There is a reason that -the law-, and the moral and ethical philosophies behind it, must view humans this way, but no excuse exists for intellectual philosophy interested solely in search of truth.
Maybe most people are afraid to empathize with people they identify as evil for fear of what that makes them. They are terrified as being identified as anything but "normal". I think you are doing it yourself in this statement.
Every person is capable of doing evil or condoning evil. The idea that "they" are different from "us", takes away our capacity to empathize with them. Look how easily so many Americans condone torture, comforting themselves in the belief it a) makes them safe, and b) is happening to people who deserve it. Well no one has found any of these prisoners guilty of anything because there have been no trials, no investigations. It sufficed that they were Afghan, Iraqi, Saudi etc. It is likely many of the prisoners are not terrorists, were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/19/ex-bush-official-guantanamo-bay-innocent/
Bush et al denounced whole swathes of the world as being part of an "Axis of Evil" and then proceded to do unspeakable evil themselves. There is no difference between one human being and another apart from his or her capacity to recognize the struggle between light and dark within themselves and the choices they make.
"The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts.” Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
"There is no difference between one human being and another apart from his or her capacity to recognize the struggle between light and dark within themselves and the choices they make."
No, that is just a pithy truism.
The difference between you and Phineas Gage is that you weren't lobotomized when an explosion drove a railroad spike through your head.
He was a compulsive emotional child every day of his life after that, and not because he decided to be.
See, my point is that is that human beings are not absolutes. So philosophies that assume so immediately run into a million exceptions that prove the rules against their clever wordplay.
Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer didn't have a political axe to grind, they were predatory monsters who were only capable of preying on other humans because they saw them as mere objects. As much as anyone might empathize with being put on trial, being put in prison, no one can empathize with their -acts-. No one who isn't a sociopath can empathize with a desire to kill solely for gratification.
"They are terrified as being identified as anything but "normal". I think you are doing it yourself in this statement."
What a condescending load, honestly. I think people who cannot admit the natural realities and biological fragility of human life are afraid that their trite quotes and absolutism might no longer comfort them.
I say that human beings are not biological absolutes, and suddenly I'M the one afraid to be identified as anything but "normal"? I'm saying we're all unique genetic mutations and that our cognizance and conscience are subject to physiological forces, that's far from your ridiculous accusation.
And you're giving me links about stuff I never brought up? If you want to know my politics, go look up my other posts. I don't need to get lectured in things I not only already know, but things that I post about myself -IN RELEVANT CONTEXTS-.
There, but for the grace of God, go I?
Why don't you go somewhere meaningful like Gaza or Beirut to deliver your Pious InSights. Waiting.
Looks like his comments hit a nerve...
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
