9/11 Versus Star Wars

The story starts innocently enough--you see, I failed as a parent.  Yes, my minions are 11 and 7 respectively, and until this weekend they'd never seen the original Star Wars movies.  I know, I know... blasphemy.  I really have no good excuse to offer, but I did rectify the situation by borrowing the DVD set from my friend and colleague Denver Braa (yes, that's his real name).  A true Star Wars fanatic "Double D" is; the kind of fellow who dressed up in a Boba Fett outfit at the midnight showing of Episode III.

But I digress.  We had family movie night Friday and Last night, watching "A New Hope" on Friday and both "Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi" last night.  Even after 20 plus years, the films are absolute magic.  AS fate would have it, the DVD set also came with a disc of bonus material, and thus we gathered this morning with our eggs and toast (art of this complete breakfast) to watch a making Of Star Wars documentary.  Numerous commentators mentioned how the original Star Wars, a classic tale of Good versus Evil, came at the tail end of the bitter and confused 1970's.  Vietnam had just ended a few years earlier, as had The oil embargo.  Nixon had gone down in infamy and the 60's counterculture movement had reached a point of confusion.  All of this came to a head in the theaters, which were filled with gritty or jaded youth tales such as Death Wish and Easy Rider.

Enter Star Wars; the above said "classic tale of Good Versus Evil" that took America out of the doldrums and brought back some fun and imagination.  And here I was, almost thirty years after the original release sharing the same fun and imagination with my own kids.  Considering the film's effects have held up surprisingly well, I don't doubt my grandkids will see them, too.  After the documentary ended, though, my daughter, a voracious reader just like myself, asked, "won't writers ever run out of things to say?  How do they keep coming up with plots?"

In true, fatherly pontificating fashion, I answered, "everything has already been written.  If you boil down Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Harry Potter, The Wheel of Time, etc., you'll find the same plot used over and over again:  the hero, the big bad foozle, the heroine, the sidekick.  Its a plot line used since before Beowulf and Gilgamesh, a plot that touches our emotions to this day.  The hope that good will always triumph over evil."

I wish that were the case.  The irony is I shared this fatherly moment on September 11, four years after our "crusade against the enemies of Democracy" began.  Of course numerous players have made it out the be yet another classic battle of good versus evil to the 5-minute blurb span of Joe America; in truth human conflict is never that cut and dry.  For al-Qaida, Iran, Iraqi insurgents, North Korea, etc., the US is the epitome of evil--the Galactic Empire, if you will. 

For me, I have the right to express myself in the blog, practice my own faith (or lack thereof), make gobs of cold hard cash... basically anything I want to do within the realm of generally logical laws--in short "Good" within my point of view.  For al-Qaida, we're an arrogant, land-grabbing, culture destroying, godless society, conquering everything they hold near and dear:  thus, we're "Evil."  One person's terrorist is another's Freedom Fighter.

Just imagine a poor Storm Trooper sod being plinked by the rebel alliance.  The Star Wars mythology made the Empire evil, yet to that single Storm Trooper private the rebel alliance was a threat to Galactic order and stability (of course, he could've just been there for the college money).  If you watch Star Wars critically, aside from Darth Vader, what does the Empire do on screen that's evil?  Fight a rebellion?  The British did the same thing in the late 18th Century against a small rabble under this fellow named George Washington--we were mere rebels.  Or terrorists.   (My take is the empire established order at the cost of democracy, such as disbanding the senate).

This post may be the complete antithesis of my "tribes" post, but its my job to represent the opponent's point of view to my commander, and that point of view will rarely be strictly rebel alliance or galactic empire; it will always be nuanced shades of Grey between absolute white and black.  As long as Joe America can live their lives in peace, I'm willing to put up with such psychological chaos on their behalf.

And if that means I have to look like Darth Vader to my opponents, so be it.

Comments

[carly]

I’m a little confused by this post. Do you consider war just a game that you play—a game you could just as easily play for “the other side” or one of the other sides, because in some abstract sense their “mission” is as honorable and justifiable as ours? Do you really believe in the sort of moral relativism that’s implied here—that any behavior is justified if the people exhibiting it believe in the “righteousness” of their cause?

If you look at history, every nation….every movement….every empire—whether they were labeled evil or not--- had a rationale…a cause…a justification for what they perpetrated. If you look at what motivates anyone, there are always “facts” they can point to in defense of their actions, no matter how heinous. I’m sure Hitler believed he was the savior of a people who had been grievously treated, and that he was doing the “right” thing for his people by purging the “evil” elements in their midst. Likewise Pol Pot—and lots of other aggressive leaders who perpetrated monstrous evil in the name of "freedom" were--in their own minds, at least--righteous...only striving to make things “right” for their people….to defend against enemies who would oppress and abuse them.

I suspect that you are perhaps only making a semantic distinction---reminding us that we should not be so quick to call our enemy “evil”. But are we also to refrain from judging his actions because of some passionate idealism or sense of historic victim-hood that motivates him? Are we to give bad behavior a pass because of what those who perpetrate it may (or may not) have in their hearts?

I have no doubt whatsoever that members of Al-Qaida (well, at least most of them) believe that they are doing the “right” thing…that they are defending themselves, honoring their god, protecting their world from western aggression. Are they themselves evil? I don't know. I don't care. The fact is, I don’t give a rat’s ass whether—in some cosmic sense—they’re righteous--or even “right”. I don't care WHY they do what they do...what motivates their behavior. I just look at the behavior.

Intentionally killing innocent civilians to make a point is wrong. Period. There can be no excuse for this….no rationalization. People who do this don’t deserve our respect; they don't deserve to be called "freedom fighters". I think even calling them "terrorists" elevates them to a level they don't deserve. They’re murderers.

I don’t recall George Washington sending a contingent to London to kill a few thousand innocent people working in the Lloyds Building, do you?

[The Mad Pigeon]

Ta da! The Mad Pigeon makes a rare appearance in his own comments section!

I've several responses:

1. You are correct in saying, "I suspect that you are perhaps only making a semantic distinction---reminding us that we should not be so quick to call our enemy “evil”."

2. However, I don't mean to support terrorist activity; I'm merely playing the same devil's advocate that I play for my bosses. I try to see through my opponents eyes to determine what motivates them, how to understand them... and then how to kill them or find a peaceful solution--motivations usually come with weaknesses one can exploit, for good or ill.

[Stella]

It seems this latest geopolitical conflict has the East and West both pointing the finger at the other making accusations of evil. But what it all boils down to is a pissing contest between little men who think their way should control the world. Neither is right, and while they haggle over bullshit ideologies, the true sufferers, the children of Africa, are left out in the cold as always because the continent has no strategic interest for East or West. Fuck Star Wars, Fuck Bush, Fuck Osama Bin Laden. Fuck 'em all because when Africa goes, we're all gonna go and there ain't a damn thing no Galactic Empire, Koran, or King James Bible can do about it. As we sit here on our fat asses contemplating the asinine tactics of governments and rebel groups, children of Africa are dropping dead like flies from starvation, disease, and God knows what else. You talk about good movies, go see The Constant Gardener. It will open your eyes and make you realize just how fucking trivial the games of political hegemony really are. That movie made me angry. My generation has been shouting and working for years for the government to do something about Africa. In the early oo's momentum was there to start and just as it looked as though there was finally going to be a shift in focus to Africa, those ragheaded pricks fly planes into the Twin Towers effectively wiping Africa off the political landscape. Now the focus is on security, war, and everybody is armed to the teeth. It is the politics of fear now in both the East and West. The general public has its asshole puckered so tight from being scared due to daily security warnings of orange, gold, or whatever, they are confused to the hilt. Everybody's so busy diving for cover, Africa has gotten lost in the fray. East and West both make me sick. Perhaps if both weren't so selfish and self-absorbed with their preoccupation that their way is the right way, the problems of the rest of the world might have a chance at being solved. East and West should take their heads out of their asses and go do something unselfish for the poor people of Africa, who don't bitch to the rest of the world about what they haven't got but are just grateful to be given ANYTHING!!!!

[Chairman Tao]

Pig

seems to me that you have it about right. Of course there is no black and white, but shades of grey.

And as you clearly understand (perhaps from reading Sun Tzu ?) to know how your enemy thinks is key to military success.

It is also wise to know that to many, you *are* Darth Vader. No matter how nice a guy you really are, to many of the world's population you represent the World's bully. It's a harsh truth which many Americans seem to want to ignore.

Carly - you are right that the killing of innocent civilians is wrong. Period. But do you honestly believe that innocents have not died as a result of American foreign policy ? Daily ?
And what about the collective amnesia of all those New Yorkers who for years supported NORAID, the fund raising wing of the Provisional IRA. Money which directly resulted in the ongoing terrorist campaign against the British. Money which slaughtered endless British women and children.
I am not belittling the terrible, terrible experiences of 9/11 - merely reminding that few nations are without innocent blood on their hands.

Stella - you raise an interesting point regarding Africa versus the 'ragheads' (hmm, interesting term).
Actually, Africa was a pawn in the cold war between East and West as much as the Arab states. But as Soviet influence diminished it was the Arab world that was better positioned to offer a threat to the US and indeed Russia.

But *both* areas have suffered terribly under both US and Soviet foreign policies. And, yes, there are a lot of VERY pissed off people as a result. The Arabs happen to have the wealth (and the organised religious lever)to capitalise on that.

Sadly Africa will probably always be poor. Because *someone* has to pay for the standard of living enjoyed by the affluent West.

Are we all willing to take a <> drop in our standards of living in order to pay for a more equitable world ?
Because if we are not, then we will need more Darth Vaders.

Like Pig said. It ain't all black and white.

[carly]

Hey Chairman,
I was very careful to include the word "intentional" when I talked about the killing of innocent civilians--I did that specifically to avoid being ensnared in one of those discussions of all the intricacies of geopolitics that ultimately becomes a high-brow version of "well you pushed me first".

Bottom line: INTENTIONALLY harming civilians (who are, by definition, innocent in that they're non-combatants....yeah I know all the traps....how some even question the definition of "innocent"... so I'll leave that alone too)is wrong. It's bad. INTENTIONALLY KILLING CIVILIANS IS WRONG. No matter who you are, no matter what your cause is. As members of the human family we have the right--the obligation!--to condemn that, regardless of what we may think about the rightness or wrongness their cause. No amount of cultural or moral relativism ranting can convince me otherwise--believe me, people have tried--it doesn't work ;) Those arguments fail because the logic fails...it falls apart.

I happen to think the Basques' cause in Spain is just. I like Basques. I think they should get what they want. But I condemn their tactics. Even though they usually issue warnings before they blow something up, civilians have been hurt and they're wrong for having done that.

I'd love to see Ireland Irish. But I hate the tactics of the IRA as much as I hate those of the Orangemen. And I'm offended by the fact that people have for years helped fund these violent efforts.

I differentiate the "righteousness" of a cause from the rightness of the tactics employed in its interest. Don't you?

As for your question about US making a sacrifice to "equalize" things vis a vis other nations....it seems to me that you either favor us butting in or not. I tend to be something of an isolationist. You seem to want it both ways.... I think that's disingenuous and intellectually dishonest. But then again, that's a strictly logical response, not an emotional one.

[carly]

O yeah...when did our fearless blog leader go from Pidge to Pig? Did I miss something?

[Stella]

Tao,

I chose the term "ragheads" because I'm not ashamed to use a politically incorrect word when I'm pissed off.

I'm tired of the p.c. world and am more a proponent of reasonable tolerance. I don't believe in bending over backwards to the point where the majority is compromised by the minority. I've put up with that most of my life with the French here in Canada and have seen the damaging effects favoring that minority has had on the nation. Even Tony Blair has seen the light and basically stated people who do not want to adopt British ways if they immigrate to Britain should go elsewhere. I say "hip, hip, hooray" to Blair for having the guts to stand up and say it because its true. I've certainly never been given any quarter regarding my rights in foreign countries and didn't expect any. I've been shoved, slapped, spit on and dragged down the street all due to the color of my skin and the fact I'm western. I didn't squawk about my "rights" or take anybody to court. I just sucked it up and kept on going because there were no laws in place to help me. I've found our human rights laws here in North America have been abused over the slightest whiff of racism perceived by a minority to the point all rational discussion is thrown out the window. For example, a referee at a recent youth soccer game questioned the headgear of a young Sikh boy on one of the teams as headgear is not allowed by international FIFA rules. The referee was thinking of the child's safety, nothing else. But it was turned into a racist issue by the child's ethnic community and the uproar has yet to die down. Its ridiculous stuff like that that has turned me off to p.c. because its unreasonable.

Frankly, I don't think it matters what I call the human garbage that blew up the WTC. Everyone has used such terms in private, I just choose not to be a hypocrite. I reccommend you rent the movie CRASH, it examines the taboo subject of prejudice and racism all colors have towards each other. Whether we like it or not, its a fact of life. I'm human and sometimes ugly things come out of my mouth, but at least I don't go around showing my displeasure with another race by blowing up thousands of innocent people.

[Stella]

And furthermore, it seemed a casual tone you took in stating Africa will always be poor because someone has to pay for our standard of living. Perhaps I misinterpret but it seemed rather pompous and callous. I vehemently disagree with your statement because I don't mind having a lower standard of living, hell, I barely have a pot to piss in now. I'm not a junk food consuming, bling wearing, Escalade driving, cell phone gabbing, designer clothes wearing, polluting, and God knows what else pig that most westerners are so I wouldn't miss any of it if it meant the children of Africa were better off.

[The Mad Pigeon]

Don't make me pull anyone apart...

(and yes, it's "Pidge." Stella merely made a clerical error the other day and I corrected her over a cup of tea. Unless the Chairmen did intentionally call me "Pig," in which case I suppose I should put an apple in my mouth and grill myself in a hot charcoal pit for 12 hours).

[Chairman Tao]

no Pig was the result of fat fingers and the lack of proof reading. No offence intended.
(I actually meant Pige as we spell "pidgeon" "pigeon" over here)

Carly- I do not feel we are that far apart depite the capital letters. I just can't stop at the definition of "intentionally killing innocent people". I will alwyas go further and comdemn actions which will "inevitably result in the death of innocents".

It's a little off point though. I just wanted to highlight that we are all shades of grey and it is important to recongnise this in order to understand (though not necessarily) motivations.

RE: "it seems to me that you either favor us butting in or not... You seem to want it both ways.... I think that's disingenuous and intellectually dishonest"

no, but I would like to see the US engage in world affairs as an equal partner with other nations. Rather than stomping around acting as judge, jury and executioner (and trying to defend the position by claiming to be the "world's policeman")

sed quis custiodes custiodet ipsos

[Chairman Tao]

actually I see you spell pigeon pigeon too. I seem to be having a bad week.

Regords
Choremean towel.

(going for a lie down)

[carly]

When I say I'm an isolationist, I not only mean that I have no interest in us being "the world's policemen", I mean I'd like it if we had nothing to do with other countries beyond engaging with them in mutually beneficial trade, and accepting some refugees who flee oppressive regimes and come to America to have the privilege of freedom. I don't think we're the world's nannies either. Obviously, this is a utopian vision--and one that is no longer even a remote option for this country; it hasn't been for centuries. I would agree that many mistakes have been made...that we've vastly overstepped our mission. I think the original mission of America (a mission I think was uniquely great and good), has been long since lost. And I think that's a terrible shame.

It seems to me that most of the problems we've had (and the reasons others in the world have felt uncomfortable or angry with us) are the result of going so far beyond our original mission. We've tried to "help" in a way that seemed--and might have been--nation building. And then we've had to defend ourselves and our allies as a result. If it were up to me, I'd have avoided contacts of both types. America should exist for Americans. If people elsewhere in the world want to partake of our sumptuous meal, I think they need to be here with us.

Our country has always been open to those who chose to come, to emigrate, assuming they have done so legally and with a goal of becoming citizens, with all the privileges and responsibilites that requires (or at least implies). I'd be happy to have people from other places come here and enjoy our freedoms...take advantage of the opportunities this country provides to all people who are willing to work hard and play by the rules. History demonstrates that those who do this find success in this society. It may take a generation or two to achieve full success, but it happens. (If you are going to suggest that certain groups have been left out of the American dream as a result of some "ism", I repeat that you should read Sowell's Ethnic America...or even read the post in my journal today (livejournal.com/users/valkyrjan) in which I refer readers to an article by George Will that speaks part of the harsh, painful truth. )

My philosophy of life (if I have one at all, beyond right here/right now=you/me, do unto others as you wish them to do unto you), is that we should all take responsibility for ourselves--as individuals and as a nation. There are gray areas within that credo, obviously, but the essential position is my black/white. Taken to its logical conclusion, I think that works very well. I'm not a fan of Rand, but I do think she had a point when she said that if we all act in our own best interest, and we assume that others do likewise, the world will be a congenial place. That's human nature; always has been, always will be. I would add to that: be kind to those around you and try to show them--through your own words and deeds--how to be kind as well. I think I live this philosophy--as much as is possible in a community of others. I think I teach by example, or maybe I just bring out the best in other people because it's my experience that almost everyone I meet treats me the same respect and care I offer to them. I have as little patience with selfishness as I have with self-pitying whining.

As you said, I don't think we're so different--not in the outcome we wish for, anyway. I think our vision of how to achieve that outcome is another story.