`Us versus them' leads predictably to barbarism

[dArKeR]

By Jeffrey Sachs

Monday, May 31, 2004,Page 9

One consequence of the Iraq war is to expose (once again) the false divide between "civilized" and "barbarous" nations. The US seems as capable of barbarism as anyone else, as the abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison make clear. Much of the time the barbarism in Iraq goes unrecorded, as when US tanks sweep into Iraqi neighborhoods and kill dozens of innocents in the name of fighting "insur-gents." But barbarism is found in many quarters, as the grisly beheading of a US hostage made clear.

Every society, under certain conditions, is vulnerable to a descent into barbarism. Many historians have argued that German society under Hitler was somehow uniquely evil. False. Germany was destabilized by defeat in World War I, a harsh peace in 1919, hyperinflation in the 1920s and the Great Depression of the 1930s, but was otherwise not uniquely barbarous. On the contrary, in the early part of the 20th century, Germany was one of the world's richest countries, with enviably high education levels and scientific prowess. Hannah Arendt was closer to the mark when she wrote about the "banality of evil," not its uniqueness.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/05/31/2003157699

[cosmicdot]

1. "a descent into barbarism"

just watching TV, say daytime TV, makes me think we have mini-Roman Forums in our homes ...

The featured essay on DU's opening page (link below), entitled "The Evil of Banality", is a great article ... having a scary glimpse of a callous streak in our Society ...

... has there always been one; and, technology brings things closer to home? I believe people have become more mean-spirited. Has television and related media made impervious to pain; and, 'unfeeling'? A work discussion of a group's departmental dysfunction/conflict found the Founding Principles work into the self-evaluation; and, one of the good ol'boys said: "Who cares?" ... and, that's exactly the mindset of those who fit that mold ... they're only interested in maintaining their power (abuse is used) and, of course, to make tons of money at the expense at everyone else.




Great article there by Pamela Troy - very thought-provoking ...

and, scary.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/04/06/04_banality.html

[myopic4141]

2. Abdicating control.

There is a fine line between acting civilized and barbarous. This is especially so regarding soldiers for they are taught barbaric skills to be used under barbarous circumstances. That is why there must be strict control to prevent soldiers from crossing the line. The strength of control starts from the very top of the command chain and here, Bush failed. The failure comes from Bush's "the end justifies the means" approach to policy. Not only is it us vs them, it is also "the path to success does not matter" that Bush promoted. Bush has been accused of being myopic in vision; but, even those with myopia have peripheral vision. Bush's malady is not myopia. Instead, it is tunnel vision which does not allow him to see the peripheral consequences of his actions while viewing that which is before him. Those below Bush are similarly afflicted for they too do not see the consequences befalling them while blindly moving forward. Foolishly, they take to heart that no one will pay attention to how the mission was accomplished once objectives have been met. As a result, the attitude trickles further down the ranks until it reaches the lowest echelons of those who are trained to live on the fine line between civilized and barbarous. Once control has been abdicated, the line is crossed leaving destruction in its wake.
The blame does not lie with those on the bottom although they too must be punished for their transgressions. Lapses of ethics is no excuse for barbarous behavior as we found out long ago. Those soldiers caught crossing the line are in a no win situation in that punishment will be meted whether orders are obeyed or disobeyed. It is the conscious of each soldier that will determine which punishment is to be the more acceptable to their psyche whether it is the punishment for disobeying an order or the punishment for acting barbaric under inappropriate circumstances. However, the meted punishments should not stop with those at the bottom. Equal punishment should be forthcoming to those who created the environment in which the line was crossed. The only question that remains is, "will that punishment be given"?

[Carl Brennan]

3. Al Gore made a good point

about the torture being a natural consequence of the of the Bush presidency.