Dehumanizing others is no virtue

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/greeley/cst-edt-greel04.html

To hate other humans or to feel no pain at their suffering, it is necessary to dehumanize them, to write them off as less than human. The Nazis are the classic example of this dehumanization. Germans were the obermensch, the master race. Jews, Slavs, Gypsies were the untermensch, the inferior peoples who barely had the right to exist.

The Puritans dehumanized Native Americans, white Americans dehumanized African Americans, Irish Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland dehumanized one another, as do Jews and Arabs in the Mideast, and Shiite and Sunni Muslims. In every case, one attributes to the "other" characteristics that prove that they are not fully human by the use of stereotypes -- "illegals," for example. The American soldiers who tortured, beat, raped and murdered Iraqis dismiss their victims as "rag heads." The rest of us are able to ignore the pain and the grief of ordinary Iraqis, as I learned from responses to my last column, by arguing that Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attack or that Saddam Hussein killed far more than have died under our inept and unplanned "occupation."

The first argument is ignorant. Bush administration officials have admitted in whispers that no evidence has been found of a link between al-Qaida and Iraq. It is also immoral because it assumes that revenge is appropriate. The second argument reveals twisted immorality. Because Saddam was a mass murderer, Americans are not responsible for our failure to protect Iraqis when we have taken charge of their country. He was worse than we are, he killed through commission, we kill (for the most part) through omission. Our only sins were to make war on the basis of false arguments with little understanding of the people whose social system we destroyed and to establish an occupation of arrogant incompetence. Thus the ineffable Paul Wolfowitz, the intellectual architect of the Iraq war, could say, "I think that there are ethnic differences in Iraq, but they are exaggerated." snip

Joel Preston Smith, one of my e-mail commentators, writes he was in Iraq before the war and after it began. "If I hadn't been treated so well, maybe I wouldn't feel so connected to the families and friends who sheltered me, fed me, helped me do my work. But I see the vast majority of Iraqis as incredibly kind, thoughtful people. And it is a knife in my heart, every day, to see them suffer." Many Americans do feel a similar knife, but many others dispense themselves from any feelings of grief or responsibility. snip

Are all Americans responsible for the administration's ignorance and arrogance in Iraq? Surely not. Yet those who still defend the war with clichés and phony arguments despite all the published evidence to the contrary are whistling in the dark as they pass the graveyard.

[NashVegas]

1. We're In a "Hate Thy Neighbor" Kind of Era

Sad ..

[Deja Q]

5. In the name of people who proclaim to "Love Thy Neighbor",

or as the Bible says.


:shrug:

[mom cat]

2. That was eloquent and so true. Thanks. K&R

It certainly app;ies to the conflict in Lebanon too.

[TygrBright]

3. hmmmm.... Does this include freepers and other GOPpie types?

How about the DLC?

Joe Lieberman?

dubiously,
Bright

[KaptBunnyPants]

10. They do a good enough job of dehumanizing themselves.

What is your point, anyway - that we should just let the Republicans/DLC control the country forever or that dehumanization is OK?

[Posteritatis]

13. Sure, why wouldn't it? (nt)

[Mandate My Ass]

4. agreed, but they're not whistling in the dark past the graveyard

They're deliberately blinding their eyes and shutting their ears to the needless suffering so they can continue to feel superior, and in charge.

Particularly concerning the recent I/L conflict, hierarchies mean everything to these people.

[bobbolink]

6. And it starts right here, with us, in the same party....

There's a lot of dehumanizing that goes on right here, in these topics on DU.

We could wage peace by starting right here, and disagree with common courtesy.

Wadda concept...

Oh, and also the Hawaiians were in the same dehumanized category as the Native Americans. Almost wiped out, they were....

[TahitiNut]

7. Dehumanization of the "enemy" is essential in any war.

It's how troops are indioctrinated. It's how the civilian popluation is controlled. It's one of the very first efforts undertaken. Anything that humanizes "them" is suppressed. "They" are never referenced as people or in any term that might convey respect. "Terrorists"! (Not "freedom fighters.") During WW2, everyone said "Japs," "Nips," "Krauts," "Jerrys," and other demeaning objectivist terms. "They're" never called people - mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters - except by those on the "wrong side."

[NashVegas]

12. Have I Mentioned How Tired I Am, of the Word, "Illegals?"

Just sayin'

[BrotherBuzz]

8. Gustave Gilbert's jailhouse interview with Herman Goering

We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

[applegrove]

9. Very true. Very true. Dehumanizing is the devil's work. And the work

of political slicers and dicers. And the elites who fund such work.

Why Liberals have much more in common with the truly religious than ever.

Cause the message of Jesus or of humanists..is...we are all together, treat others as you would want to be treated...and don't make innocent civilians into an "other" so that you will not care if they are attacked in your name.

[Dover]

11. It's also against the Geneva Conventions...for what that's worth.

These are the rules of war, though Rummy would likely be quick to call them "the old rules to the old style war." Doesn't seem to be any enforcement mechanism. So sad we even need rules to keep us human.


Geneva Conventions

Chapter I. General Provisions
Art. 1. The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.

Art. 2. In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

Art. 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. (2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

Art. 4. Neutral Powers shall apply by analogy the provisions of the present Convention to the wounded and sick, and to members of the medical personnel and to chaplains of the armed forces of the Parties to the conflict, received or interned in their territory, as well as to dead persons found.

cont'd

http://www.spj.org/gc-text1.asp?#49