The Wisdom of Solomon - Democratic Underground

NanceGreggs

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu May-14-09 08:38 PM
Original message

The Wisdom of Solomon

After reading the many opinions posted today, here and elsewhere, about the release/non-release of photographs evidencing torture, I find myself longing to live in the black-and-white world that is seemingly inhabited by many – that place where every issue is a matter of being one-hundred-percent right or wrong, devoid of any shade of gray, where doing the right thing is obvious, and consequences need never be considered.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how one sees these things), I dwell in the real world, where little is as cut-and-dry as one would hope; where shadows tend to intrude on sunny scenarios, blurring the lines between light and dark, prompting inconvenient things like doubt, and a necessity to weigh and measure actions against the reactions they may cause.

I have seen opinions delivered as absolutes: Everyone already knows what we did, complete transparency means no exceptions, the pursuit of justice should never be weighed against the consequences of said pursuit – let the chips fall where they may.

I have also seen logic tortured into becoming complete nonsense: Supressing photographs of torture is tantamount to condoning it, considering the consequences of their widespread release is just an excuse to protect the guilty – and the truly astounding concept that any opinion expressed against releasing these photos is equivalent to declaring that “everything Bush did is okay with you.”

In truth, saying that “everyone already knows what we did” is the assertion of a fact not in evidence. Undoubtedly there are those who know what was done. But there are also those who do not know the true nature of it, nor the extent of it. To say that “everybody knows” the details of what went on is like saying everybody knows that the re-election of G.W. Bush to a second term was fraught with voting irregularities, when we ALL know that many people – regardless of access to the information readily available from various sources – actually know no such thing.

And of course the belief that everybody already knows begs the question: If everybody DOES already know, why is it necessary to reiterate what is already known?

Most fair-minded, justice-seeking people would argue that “transparency” should never be qualified nor negotiated – and yet those same people would never debate that rape-shield laws, where a lack of transparency (i.e. the withholding of names and certain information) is deemed not merely acceptable, but necessary in recognition of the greater good.

I have seen the opinion expressed that withholding these photographs from the public view is simply a matter of trading the public’s right-to-know in exchange for a little bit of security. One wonders if those whose loved ones are currently in the Middle East would consider the possible backlash of violence against their children a matter of “a little bit” of security.

All of this is to say one thing, and it is my opinion only: On this particular issue of the release of these photographs, we should all accept that this is a case – if ever there was one – of being able to respectfully agree to disagree.

There IS no absolute answer here. For every valid argument there is to withhold these photos from public view, there is an equally valid argument for releasing them. There are consequences to either decision, and what those consequences might be are, at this point, a matter of speculation at best.

Let’s remember that the Biblical tale of Solomon, real or imagined, was told in hindsight, and in light of an innocent babe being returned to its loving, rightful mother. Would we have heard this story, and revered it as a sign of incredible insight into true justice being served, had the child been cut in half, its bloody remains delivered equally to both claimants?

Of course not.

Where do I personally stand on this issue? At present, I stand on both sides. I understand the need to acknowledge the guilt of what was done in our country’s name. I also appreciate the necessity of weighing and measuring the impact of the possible aftermath on innocents who may be targeted as representative of our government’s transgressions, and those who might be prompted to violence in retaliation for our many sins – a violence that may end in their own destruction and death.

That may be perceived by some as sitting on the fence. I perceive it as an acknowledgment that I am not privy to all of the facts that surround this issue and, as a result, my position on that fence is not a matter of indifference, but a result of having to defer to those who know more than I do.

I wish I had the Wisdom of Solomon, the legendary elder of old who knew that things would end as they should, who knew, without hesitation or second-guessing, that justice would triumph in the end and the consequences thereof would be heralded for centuries as a shining example of having done the right thing, concluding in a suitably happy ending for all concerned.

It’s comforting to imagine this movie fading to black – but those pesky shades of gray, whether you like them, accept them, acknowledge them, or ignore them – are still there, clouding the screen as the credits roll.

I do not purport to have the Wisdom of Solomon. Neither does Barack Obama. And neither, in my humble opinion, should any one of you.

To speak in absolutes – this is what WILL happen, this is what the consequences WILL be, this is what WILL ensue in the aftermath – is arrogantly ignorant at best and, at its worst, a foolhardy foray into an uncertain future that may lead to consequences no one wants to live with in the decades to come.

Whether I personally agree with President Obama’s ultimate stance on this issue is neither here nor there. I knew going into his election, and my support thereof, that he would do things I agreed with, as well as things I disagreed with strongly. And that wasn’t prescience; it was simply common sense. The only person I will ever agree with one hundred percent of the time is myself – and last time I looked, I was not elected to the highest office in the land.

For the past eight years, many of us have railed against the “cowboy mentality” of Bush and his supporters – those who felt that acting first and considering the consequences of those actions after-the-fact was the way to run a nation.

I, for one, am grateful that we now have a President who considers all options, who listens to all arguments, who thinks ahead – and ultimately acts accordingly. And while I may disagree with his final decisions, I am confident that those decisions are the result of having assessed information that undoubtedly weighs heavily on the heart and mind.

There is something to be said for the idea – nay, the ideal – that reasonable people can disagree without dismissing the concerns of those who take a different view, that two well-meaning individuals, given the same set of known facts, can come to completely different conclusions as to the best course of action on a go-forward basis.

I am not advocating taking one position or another. What I am advocating is the respect we should be showing one another in the face of a complex question that – despite the extremists on both sides who know everything – truly has no simple answer.