A brief guide to reacting to terrorism and hate crimes without contributing to the problem
This isn’t one of those articles with stories about examples of amazing Muslims and bad white extremists. It is also not an article about the east versus the west. I just want to draw a big picture, and propose that some opinions, might be yours or mine, can unconsciously be racist or Islamophobic (or whatever), even if the intention is not. Before suggesting the actions we can do to avoid being part of the problem, let me first walk you through some thoughts about the problem itself:
Well, let’s talk about racism as an example. Slavery has existed for many years and was a core element of many old economies. The beneficiaries from such a profitable economic system had to make slavery socially acceptable to allow this economic system to thrive. For the US case as an example, those beneficiaries were the early migrants who happen to be both economic and political leaders especially in the south, and they did their best to shape the economy and the social life so that slavery grew untouched.
In the process of engaging the society so that they understand and accept slavery as normal, multiple channels were developed to demean black people and justify enslaving them, such as political lobbying, legalizations or even movies. Between citing biblical texts and interpretations, creating rhetoric about white superiority, and systemically demonizing black communities, the American society adopted hateful and abusive rhetoric towards its black community.
Unfortunately, even with the abolishment of slavery after a long and daunting journey of activism, the rhetoric had infected the socio-political sphere, especially with a lack of mechanisms for a holistic and fast change. This explains how after many years without slavery, racism still exists and thrives in the US, manifesting in incarceration, discriminatory housing and lending practices, police brutality … etc.
The above was an example of what economic and political systems sometimes do to gain the support of a certain agenda, which often results in a residual or a spill-over effect that is deeply ingrained in the heart of many societies. We call this a Systemic Problem.
If a public employee took a bribe to finish your papers, and some employees started to follow his lead, and some citizens started using this backdoor to finish what they need faster, it creates cycles of behavior that deepen with repetition till the system itself embraces this as a new and commonly accepted behavior or norm. A major segment of this society, even if they disagree with bribery, would just ignore the issue and move on with few instances of protest. This is an example of how a systemic problem emerges and prevails. Other examples of systemic issues are homelessness, sexual harassment, racial profiling, discrimination in the workplace, sexism … etc.
And when we look at systemic problems, we can’t necessarily pinpoint a specific cause or effect. We also sometimes fail to see how other sides of the problem can eventually affect us. But by observing the overall patterns that create and reinforce a systemic issue, we can identify our contribution and how to break out of them. Let’s explore some systemic issues and patterns that we are aware of, but perhaps not aware of our contributions to them:
Religion: Religious scripts are sacred to people who believe in them. A systemic problem is the different interpretations. Across history, multiple groups used the interpretation strategy to seek the support and endorsement of certain religious followers. Examples are countless: Jewish scripts interpreted to support the Israeli occupation of Palestine, Biblical texts interpreted to support crusaders or slavery or attacks on pro-choice people, Islamic texts interpreted to support terrorism or to discriminate against women. This also applies to non-religious issues. Science is sometimes used to prove that killing people is statistically a viable option to address the issue of limited resources or saving the earth.
Additionally, religions are theoretically holistic, trying to guide their believers through all facets of life. This means religion texts are all over the place. Some verses are violent and brutal and very controversial, and some are loving, caring and supportive. This duality and mixture of opposites define life.
That being said, religion and religious people are not going anywhere. Across history, no ideology managed to lead another ideology to vanish using violence or anything else. Even people who believe the earth is flat are still around. If you think you can get rid of Muslims and Islam for example, and you think that’s a good idea, you probably need to read more about Hitler and the Holocaust before entertaining the idea.
Rhetoric & ideology: humans have been engaging in wars since our existence. Before religions, before the existence of political ideologies, and before the emergence of civil societies, violence was around. But humans also liked belonging and fitting in with a larger group, especially if this group is powerful or more superior.
One systemic problem in this journey is Othering. With more and more ideologies and the rise of nationalism and national identity, the rhetoric of ‘Us versus Them’ rapidly emerged. Most of the time, it is political propaganda; but sometimes it is a common way for humans to relate to each other within a certain ideological group, and distinguish themselves from other groups, which eventually results in othering and generalization. Examples are countless, especially when we look at famous ideological fights such as liberalism versus conservatism, capitalism versus socialism, west versus east … etc. The war with the Soviet Union resulted in political rhetoric focused on Russia’s demonization. 9/11 resulted in labeling all Muslim societies as extreme or violent. An American white attacker is mentally troubled but a black attacker is inherently violent, which is a common media rhetoric responding to terrorist attacks. A policy by a Western country against Muslims leads some Arab societies to label the whole Western world as an enemy of Islam. These are all examples of othering rhetoric created by ideological wars.
With the rise of modernity and globalization, societies started to get more diverse; different ideological groups can easily connect with each other, making the othering rhetoric a time-bomb.
Social media: although there is some degree of content moderation in them, social media platforms lack mechanisms of facilitation and mediation that are necessary for social interactions and dialog. This is especially true in controversial topics, not to mention the very limited ability of societies to hold social media companies accountable for the psychological and societal consequences of these platforms. Such a systemic problem is related to the theory of social acceleration: technology and economic advancement move faster than the political and societal systems that should discuss and regulate these advancements in the first place, which results in a societal development that is rapid and against the will of the society members.
Deep old systems: I can talk forever about other deep systemic issues we inherited and didn’t deal with yet. The effect and the rhetoric built during colonization; the rhetoric built by Zionists in the west to make any criticism of Israel to be considered anti-Semitic; the demonization of the west in the Arab world using religion which contributed to radicalization; the use of religion to prosecute LGBTQ communities; the use of science to label a whole ideology evil or inherently troubled … etc.
I hope I managed to give you a stepping stone. I am sure there are a lot of other ideas for how we can respond responsibly to such tragedies. I am looking forward to your comments and thoughts.
A brief guide to reacting to terrorism and hate crimes without contributing to the problem
Research & References of A brief guide to reacting to terrorism and hate crimes without contributing to the problem|A&C Accounting And Tax Services
Source