Many year ago, some will say aeons, long before we settled on labels that helps nothing but create lines of division, when a person takes the life of another, we call it murder.
When a person, takes up arm and goes on rampage of violence, and in the process takes the lives of many, we don't struggle with what to call them or what they have done. We know who they are and understand what they have done. We may not have clarity about their reasoning or state of mind. But their actions are clear. In civil society, we call murder, murder and a murderer is a criminal.
Those were light years ago. Long before we have discovered the profit in labels. Terrorism has become a feeder for war machine after the cold war tapered into a cold wimper. Racism became a way to guilt an entire race into the crime of committed by a crazy person.
In the last ten years, mass murder has become the norm. Sometimes we call the perpetrators terrorist, sometimes we call them racists, and other times we just call them crazy criminals. Unfortunately the reason for the classification is more political than moral, it is more opportunistic than rational.
A depraved young man went on a rampage on a college campus, killing tens of students and teachers. We called him a mad man turned criminal. He was part white.
A depraved physician-soldier turns his guns on the people he was supposed to be protecting, we call him terrorist. He was of Arabic stock and Muslim.
Another depraved young man walked into a theater with a machine gun and mowed down tens of theater goers, he too was just a criminal.
A crazy kid killed his mother, then took a gun and killed toddlers and their teachers at his alma mater, where his mother was also a teacher. He was white, so he was simply a depraved criminal.
A crazy man man went into a hindu place of worship and mows down several siks. He was a racist hate criminal. Because he was white.
A couple of confused your muslime boys decided to fight for Allah, as if their God is really so weak that "he" needs their help, and instead of seeing them for what they are, we call them terrorists.
And now another crazy young man has decided that his mission in life is to create another civil war, so he visits a place of worship and historical significance. Because all his victims are black and he is white, we called him racist and his crime an hate crime. Some "christian" leaders would not even let him labelled terrorist, less that "other" tag is used to paint them and other adherents to their faith with the broad brush of terrorism. That is reserved for the "Islamic- extremists".
We use labels to divide and hid behind our weaknesses and fear. But these are crimes. Committed by depraved individuals. Somethings under the direction of others. Always enabled by the easy access to weapons and munitions. But always criminal acts.
Terrorism, Racism, hate crime and other politically sounding tags blind us to the simplicity of this crimes. We seek deeper meaning, and find an excuse to create divisions where non should exist. Our conceit lead us into wasting trillions of dollars on ill-fated wars and attempted nation and ideology shaping experiments that are steeped in our own fears that we are indeed superior to some others.
But a crime is a crime, and its perpetrator is a criminal. Criminals should be treated as such regardless of their race, religion or purported ideological leanings. They should be tried, and if convicted punished for their crimes.
We should seek to find meaning and see if there is a root cause to these crimes, just the way we should weith any other crime. But, coloring our minds by classifying crimes based on the colors or ideology of the criminal has not worked for us in the last 50 year , and are not likely to work in the next 50.
Tagging criminals the way we do today only create divides within society. Muslims feel defensive because now all grouped along with some criminals who happen to be Muslims. Whites feel defensive because some depraved criminal is pained with a brush that purports more whites are complicit than just the criminal.
The tragedy in South Carolina hurts and socks our conscience. But it is no more or less sad than the tragedy that almost took the life of Gabby Gifford, or the one that took countless lives in Aurora, or the mindless killing by Major Hassan, or the depraved mowing of toddlers in Newport. They all are mindless acts of crime against innocents. Their perpetrators are depraved criminals with god complexes. But tagging these crimes as political, racial or ideological colors only elevate the criminal and take our focus away from the real crime. We celebrate these criminals when we elevate their crimes.
These senseless acts of violence have one thing in common. Guns! But guns don't kill, people do. However, we can make it less easy for would be criminals to feel empowered to mow then twenty-seven innocent children and their teacher on a quiet school day.
When a person, takes up arm and goes on rampage of violence, and in the process takes the lives of many, we don't struggle with what to call them or what they have done. We know who they are and understand what they have done. We may not have clarity about their reasoning or state of mind. But their actions are clear. In civil society, we call murder, murder and a murderer is a criminal.
Those were light years ago. Long before we have discovered the profit in labels. Terrorism has become a feeder for war machine after the cold war tapered into a cold wimper. Racism became a way to guilt an entire race into the crime of committed by a crazy person.
In the last ten years, mass murder has become the norm. Sometimes we call the perpetrators terrorist, sometimes we call them racists, and other times we just call them crazy criminals. Unfortunately the reason for the classification is more political than moral, it is more opportunistic than rational.
A depraved young man went on a rampage on a college campus, killing tens of students and teachers. We called him a mad man turned criminal. He was part white.
A depraved physician-soldier turns his guns on the people he was supposed to be protecting, we call him terrorist. He was of Arabic stock and Muslim.
Another depraved young man walked into a theater with a machine gun and mowed down tens of theater goers, he too was just a criminal.
A crazy kid killed his mother, then took a gun and killed toddlers and their teachers at his alma mater, where his mother was also a teacher. He was white, so he was simply a depraved criminal.
A crazy man man went into a hindu place of worship and mows down several siks. He was a racist hate criminal. Because he was white.
A couple of confused your muslime boys decided to fight for Allah, as if their God is really so weak that "he" needs their help, and instead of seeing them for what they are, we call them terrorists.
And now another crazy young man has decided that his mission in life is to create another civil war, so he visits a place of worship and historical significance. Because all his victims are black and he is white, we called him racist and his crime an hate crime. Some "christian" leaders would not even let him labelled terrorist, less that "other" tag is used to paint them and other adherents to their faith with the broad brush of terrorism. That is reserved for the "Islamic- extremists".
We use labels to divide and hid behind our weaknesses and fear. But these are crimes. Committed by depraved individuals. Somethings under the direction of others. Always enabled by the easy access to weapons and munitions. But always criminal acts.
Terrorism, Racism, hate crime and other politically sounding tags blind us to the simplicity of this crimes. We seek deeper meaning, and find an excuse to create divisions where non should exist. Our conceit lead us into wasting trillions of dollars on ill-fated wars and attempted nation and ideology shaping experiments that are steeped in our own fears that we are indeed superior to some others.
But a crime is a crime, and its perpetrator is a criminal. Criminals should be treated as such regardless of their race, religion or purported ideological leanings. They should be tried, and if convicted punished for their crimes.
We should seek to find meaning and see if there is a root cause to these crimes, just the way we should weith any other crime. But, coloring our minds by classifying crimes based on the colors or ideology of the criminal has not worked for us in the last 50 year , and are not likely to work in the next 50.
Tagging criminals the way we do today only create divides within society. Muslims feel defensive because now all grouped along with some criminals who happen to be Muslims. Whites feel defensive because some depraved criminal is pained with a brush that purports more whites are complicit than just the criminal.
The tragedy in South Carolina hurts and socks our conscience. But it is no more or less sad than the tragedy that almost took the life of Gabby Gifford, or the one that took countless lives in Aurora, or the mindless killing by Major Hassan, or the depraved mowing of toddlers in Newport. They all are mindless acts of crime against innocents. Their perpetrators are depraved criminals with god complexes. But tagging these crimes as political, racial or ideological colors only elevate the criminal and take our focus away from the real crime. We celebrate these criminals when we elevate their crimes.
These senseless acts of violence have one thing in common. Guns! But guns don't kill, people do. However, we can make it less easy for would be criminals to feel empowered to mow then twenty-seven innocent children and their teacher on a quiet school day.
Comments
Post a Comment