“War on Terror”

Mimi Copp of Shalom House recently posed the question: how do you feel about the killing of Bin Laden? I lament to say I’m primarily apathetic. Although, I might feel differently if I were directly affected by the events of 9-11.

There is no part of me that feels safer than the day before Bin Laden’s killing but, then again, I don’t recall being afraid from the start. Residents of Chechnya, Libya, Rwanda, the Gaza Strip — either past or present — have had more than enough reason to soil themselves. Terrorism largely takes place in other countries, a statistic that does not include acts of terrorism that are omitted from its definition.

Part of my annoyance is with our concept of terrorism itself, a word wielded by those in power to justify anything they like by means of fear. Or better put: “Normative rules and what is legal and permissible are determined by the powerful. They formulate the concept of terrorism in normative terms and make it appear as if a neutral court derived such definitions instead of the oppressors. Terrorism is a term which is used to describe what the ‘other’ does, not what ‘we’ do.”

Our country’s direct support of terrorism inflicted by the Israeli government on the entire population of the Gaza Strip — leaving 1.5 million people devastated, imprisoned, and dying — leaves me feeling that there are ways the U.S. could stop terrorism that our government completely neglects. Even encourages with 3 billion dollars in military aid annually. This saddens me. I would rejoice in the street if this stopped.

During the “war on terror”, over 54,800 American casualties alone have been reported. The killing of Bin Laden hardly seems a victory, even for those who think killing can be victorious. I’m reminded of a scene in Braveheart where the King of England robustly declares, “Mere sheep! Mere sheep!” when told of the rebel Scots who were killed in battle. His point was that to end the rebellion, they needed to end William Wallace, their leader. A point that was proven wrong by the end of the movie. Despite the numerous historical inaccuracies of the film, the debunking of the King’s point is an accurate sociological or human assessment. Hence, there is no military solution to terrorism. In fact, terrorism often arises as a response to military domination. It leaves some with the feeling that there is nothing left to do; it is a desperate lunge to regain some control, some power;  a way to counter the feeling that their world has gone awry and there is no way to make it right. It is feeble and wrong, albeit easy to see why some might choose to shoot a rocket into Sderot, for example. I also wonder if our approach will exacerbate the problem even when we are “successful.”

How do we end the cycle of violence, fear, and hatred and instead promote reconciliation?

 

Mogwai fear Satan, but I don’t.

I haven’t been inspired to write much in the past few years, but I’m feeling so today.

Recently, I’ve been confronted with the word satan in adjective form and I’m wondering if this is a useful word.

When forced to describe it, without much thought, my mind turned to the word nuclear, which is reminiscent of satan in that people’s hyper-sensitivity to the terms are based on a pop-culture depiction of them and not a scientific or scriptural one — even for some that believe in science or scripture as truth providing. Satan is not depicted as evil, but more evil than evil. Not merely supernatural but super-super-natural. Caricatured by some as an idol of the most malicious and avarice beings imaginable. The under world of LOTR captures the grotesque-ness I’m trying to communicate. Anyone who believes in the supernatural ought to dismiss any effects culture has had on educating them on something our culture took and twisted from their own beliefs. Just as anyone who believes in science ought to dismiss the error that nuclear is tantamount to harmful radiation or weaponry.

This error has caused the misnomer (or mis-acronym?) MRI. It is Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging (NMRI) but the “n” was dropped; it was too disconcerting for many to think something nuclear was happening to them. In reality, we are nuclear; filled with billions of nuclei that we rely on for existence. And while we do not rely on satan for existence it is not unusual, at times, to share the mind of one who is going against the will of God. The bible narrative certainly includes some of God’s chosen that have. In my desire to continue developing an understanding, I think it’s helpful to look at these stories.

When Jesus predicts his own death, Peter boldly declares “This will never happen to you!” Jesus’ response is striking to say the least: “Get behind me Satan! You are a stumbling block to me…” At first the response does not seem to follow from what Peter has said. Certainly, if I were telling my closest friend that I were going to die by torturous methods, I would find comfort and care in a response like Peter’s. It seems honorable. But, Jesus is carrying out the most central part of history for those that believe in his death and resurrection. The next thing Jesus says is more revealing: “…you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.” Apparently it is satanic, according to Jesus, to be disoriented, to try to stifle God’s plan, to prevent the expression of the gospel which is of incomprehensible and irrational love. Notice too that what Peter desires does not appear base and evil. Satanic things often do not. Many translate the word Satan, used here, from the greek to mean “adversary” and that is an appropriate synonym. Few, I would assume, figure that Peter in this story is possessed and possibly not even under the direct influence of any supernatural agency. Satanic here means an attempt to prevent the things of God. Whether it derives from within or outside of us seems the trivial part of the story.

In writing this blog I’ve had a few hindering thoughts, that caused hesitation, such as how weird people will undoubtedly think I am. Those that do not believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus may wonder why I believe in cooky apparitions. And those that do might be offended, or well-read enough to say, “Now, now child. Let me instruct you on your foolish misunderstanding.” While writing about satan isn’t grand or a master plot of God’s, starting a conversation on a matter of spiritual awareness, when compelled, seems to be following the will of God, no matter how small a part. And it is quite small in every regard. But, to be stifled of doing something too small, because of that fact, is a satanic argument. If I don’t do good things because they are not big enough, I may never do good things. If I don’t feed or talk to the homeless man on my street because I cannot fix his homelessness, I may forever neglect to offer a drop of God’s love in a place where I can. This is the “belt of truth buckled around my waist” (Ephesians 6:14). Among others.

Generally, I avoid christian parlance. Its redundancy lulls me to sleep and floats by my mind without triggering a thought. But, that’s precisely why I find the word satanic helpful. It’s not apart of the current idiom. It causes a bit of a jolt. It’s awakening. And I like that.