Thanksgiving table centrepiece - arranged by Cynthia |
Thanks for nature's bounty - arranged by Cynthia's dad |
A group of
us talked briefly about this a few days ago and I suggested that there must be
a continuous, hot resentment brewing just below the surface, waiting for a trigger that will allow the mix to boil over.
It's happened in the Middle East and North Africa before—remember The
Satanic Verses?
Most certainly, there are forces waiting also for the
opportunity to foment mob rage, specifically against the United States; the USA
was no more implicated in the production of this latest insult than was Iceland
but the irrelevance of that fact was successfully propagandized out of the
equation by whatever forces were fanning these latest flames, apparently.
It's
unfortunate. The degree to which North Americans equate terrorism with Islam is
bound to escalate as a result of these demonstrations; it's already a big
problem, particularly for Muslims who have settled in North America and become
productive, civic-minded Canadians and Americans. They can protest all they
want that the violence is not sanctioned by their faith and is certainly
not endorsed by Muslims who have immigrated in order to live a better, safer
life in an atmosphere of tolerance and respect for human rights. But see one
terrorist in a head covering and human nature easily generalizes it to all
people wearing similar symbolic clothing.
The history
of civilization as we know it has demonstrated over and over again that human
rights progress can be easily undone by a very few events. One has only to
recall the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Towers in New York to realize how
much freedom of movement and right to privacy have been compromised as a
consequence. How much more may Muslim Canadians feel the tightening noose as a
result of the current upheavals?
I've
recently kept informal track of the web comments generated by news articles on
the current anti-American violence in the Middle East, North Africa, the
Philippines and Malaysia. It's not a true test of general opinion, but the
anti-Muslim comments outnumber the tolerant comments about 5 – 1. You might
well say that the internet attracts bigots, and that's likely mostly true, but
the “bigots” writing these vitriolic comments are also walking our streets,
waiting—as it were—for the coalescing of a retaliatory mob through which their
hatred can be released on the nearest representatives of that which they hate
and fear. In North America, that happens to be a highly visible minority.
Working in
Europe in the '80s, we had occasion to spend time in both Irelands and to talk
to people there about the “troubles,” which were going full force. “North
Americans don't get what's going on here,” they told us. “This is not a
Catholic/Protestant conflict at all, it's a pro and anti-colonialism struggle!
The independence people—the native Irish—just happen to be mostly Catholic and
the pro-Britain faction just happen to be mostly Protestant. Solve the
colonialism question and the two religious persuasions will get along just
fine!”
To apply
this paradigm to the Middle East holus-bolus might be oversimplifying it; I'm
no expert on all the details, but considering that the West has recently sent
armies and/or lethal weaponry to enforce its will in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait
and Libya, might it not be reasonable to suggest that there could be deep
anti-colonialist resentment driving the outbreaks—and with good reason? It's
that curious kind of a world, after all, in which it's perfectly logical that
Israel should have nuclear weapons and massive military power to defend itself,
while for Iran to possess these capabilities is considered unthinkable.
Inequality always
breeds resentment and factionalism; that's a literal truism by now. Nations
that feel equal to their neighbours, and are respected for that fact, don't
produce terrorism aimed at these same neighbours. (Local vandalism is a form of
domestic terrorism, also identifiable as a response to perceived
inequality; it works at all levels.) President Obama seemed to get this at the
beginning of his first term when he made some noises to indicate that we might
have precipitated some of the resentment that led to 9/11; he very soon learned
that American presidents don't admit to error and don't apologize . . . ever.
John 3:1-21
is a narrative about Jesus' encounter with the pharisee, Nicodemus. At the core
of the story is the phrase that has become the centrepiece for the “born again”
focus in North American Christianity: “Very truly I
tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again (NIV).”
Using metaphors of wind, darkness and light, Jesus tries to explain to Nicodemus
that he can't possibly grasp what the Kingdom of God is about until he commits
to starting over, this time seeing the world through the “spirit” as opposed to
the “flesh.”
But this
proves to be yet another metaphor that Nicodemus has trouble following.
Can nations
be “born again?” Can the Israeli/Palestinian conflict be resolved unless the
principals (and their principles) are “born again?”
It seems
unlikely.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment