The United States debating torture. A self-proclaimed God-fearing man, assumed leader of the nation, rallying for inhumane treatment of people who may or may not be guilty of a crime. I wonder how his god would feel about that.
He says this is a war for civilization, a war against evil and evil-doers. What sort of generalized anodyne is this? How can the American people be placated by such obviously ambiguous rhetoric? When have we not been against "evil"? Or terrorism? How do you conduct a war on the abstract? By bringing Baghdad taxi drivers to the brink of drowning to death?
This is the most disturbing conversation our country has ever had. How is it possible to claim the moral high ground while efforting to lower our own standards to those of the "evil-doers"?
The terrorists are bad, they behead white people, so we should be bad too to protect our goodness?
WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY?
2 comments:
The problem is that people WANT this to be true. The actual truth hurts, so it's far more comforting to pretend that we're God's Chosen People and have free reign to do whatever we want to protect our interests. We are US and they are THEM. It's that dichotomy that got us through the Cold War and there's no reason to believe that it won't be used to get us through this crisis.
Remember, these are the same people who allow Ann Coulter to have a career with statements like, "God said, 'the Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it.'"
It's not that I don't understand the mindset, I don't get how one arrives at it. Initially I thought they were just basing their morality on semantics, but now it's evident (like it wasn't before?) that they use semantics (all they have left) to justify, at least in their own minds, their own version of morality. Ends justifying the means.
Post a Comment