Terrorism By Any Other Name Still Smells The Same
I just read the Christchurch manifesto, mostly because I see that it's being censored. I disagree strongly with what this terrorist wrote, but I don't think censoring his words is going to stop his ideas from spreading- if anything it lends them credence. His manifesto is a bizarre mix of internet humor, travel blog, environmental protectionism, demographic statistics and good old fashioned racism. He openly states that he doesn't care about personal fame or recognition, he hopes to sow dissent and chaos- so far he seems to be succeeding.
Rather than attempt to censor his argument, I think it's a more fruitful approach to pick it apart piece by piece. At its core, his argument is that non-white people are having more babies than white people, which threatens the traditional culture of northern Europeans. He argues that unity is stronger than diversity, that a racially homogenous world would be the best world and that non-white immigration amounts to an invasion of the Western world. He calls for immediate action to take up arms against this imagined invasion with a focus on Muslims; his self-described radicalization happened in 2017 as a direct result of seeing this rhetoric become acceptable on the national level.
Simply calling this man an idiot and refusing to address his arguments is the best option for people who already disagree with him, but he's not alone- millions of (primarily) young men secretly harbor similar sentiments. We live in a confusing time; culture is shifting so quickly that absolute truths from 20 years ago no longer apply. One of the many reactions to rapid cultural change is to reach blindly back to an imagined utopian past; I prefer to strive blindly forward for an impossibly utopian future.
First off, I question the existence of a "white race" at all. If you traveled back in time 100 years and asked someone on the street what comprised the white race, he would say "English and German descent, without those damn Italians or Irish". One hundred years ago, American racial dissolution by "degenerate" Irish immigrants was a major perceived threat; the idea is laughable now. It's not that Americans kicked out the Irish, we just quietly absorbed and commercialized the profitable parts of their traditional culture. All of the wars fought between Catholics and Protestants, all of the arbitrary divisions people used to classify each other- all of these have faded into obscurity. All that's left is a vague sense of confusion over why people thought the divisions were important.
Second, anyone who tries to speak of "inferior" and "superior" races should be laughed out of the room. All races are not the same, but our similarities are overwhelmingly more important than our differences. Our defining quality as humans is our adaptability; this has nothing to do with skin color or traditional culture. Humans as a species are adaptable to every climate, every extreme condition that life throws our way. This has very little to do with our genetic differences and a lot to do with our capacity for altering our environment to fit our needs. To take a minor example, in my experience it seems that my Kenyan friends are more tolerant of extreme heat than I am, while I am more tolerant of extreme cold. However, I can visit deserts and they can visit glaciers- minor predispositions don't block us from living the lives we want to lead. As for why the geopolitical distribution of wealth and power looks the way it does, go read "Guns, Germs and Steel" for a better explanation than I can give here.
Third, putting aside the irony of an Australian afraid of colonization by other countries, his focus on Muslims seems misguided to me. Universally all the Muslims I have ever met and interacted with have been generous, friendly people. I don't think I'll ever understand why conservatives hate Muslims so much- these communities pray together quite frequently, church members avoid intoxicants, children do what their parents tell them... these are all the elements of the idyllic past conservatives wish to return to. Sure, there are angry young men doing stupid things in the name of Islam, but angry young men doing stupid things is also universal. Personally I think that after the end of the Cold War, American politicians decided that the country needed a new enemy and Muslims were more of a politically safe target than a real threat.
This brings me to my last point- what is traditional culture anyway? How would someone in my generation know? Technology has brought about such rapid social changes that we're still reeling from them. My life has more in common with a modern Chinese, Iranian or Kenyan computer programmer than it does with my grandfather's life or my great-grandfather's. All of us now make use of technologies that would have been unimaginable 20 years ago; our brains are quite literally altering to accommodate them. Traditional culture everywhere is eroding; the new culture forming is vast, unpredictable and incredibly exciting. By the population statistics that actually matter (literacy, infant mortality, access to education, global murder rate, etc.) humanity is doing an amazing job right now- we're winning so much that our only barrier to growth is ourselves. Personally I don't think it matters a great deal what people's skin color will be 50 years, 100 years or 1000 years from now. What matters more to me is the content of future generations' character- will they be unified under a common humanity or fragmented into competitive subcultures?
This is an incredible time to be alive- we now live in a global interconnected culture rapidly approaching a post-scarcity utopia. Virulent ideas such as those that motivated the Christchurch shooter cannot be simply censored out of existence; rather we need to inoculate against them. As that Middle-Eastern Jewish guy so deeply embedded in traditional Western culture said, "Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself" - this simple idea (mirrored and rephrased in basically every religion) is the vaccination against further terrorism. That statement is our traditional culture, that's our way of life, that's our common humanity and that's our answer to every social problem the Christchurch shooter warns against. Don't just blindly quote it- think through what it actually means, then live it.
Here are some completely unrelated puppies.
Rather than attempt to censor his argument, I think it's a more fruitful approach to pick it apart piece by piece. At its core, his argument is that non-white people are having more babies than white people, which threatens the traditional culture of northern Europeans. He argues that unity is stronger than diversity, that a racially homogenous world would be the best world and that non-white immigration amounts to an invasion of the Western world. He calls for immediate action to take up arms against this imagined invasion with a focus on Muslims; his self-described radicalization happened in 2017 as a direct result of seeing this rhetoric become acceptable on the national level.
Simply calling this man an idiot and refusing to address his arguments is the best option for people who already disagree with him, but he's not alone- millions of (primarily) young men secretly harbor similar sentiments. We live in a confusing time; culture is shifting so quickly that absolute truths from 20 years ago no longer apply. One of the many reactions to rapid cultural change is to reach blindly back to an imagined utopian past; I prefer to strive blindly forward for an impossibly utopian future.
First off, I question the existence of a "white race" at all. If you traveled back in time 100 years and asked someone on the street what comprised the white race, he would say "English and German descent, without those damn Italians or Irish". One hundred years ago, American racial dissolution by "degenerate" Irish immigrants was a major perceived threat; the idea is laughable now. It's not that Americans kicked out the Irish, we just quietly absorbed and commercialized the profitable parts of their traditional culture. All of the wars fought between Catholics and Protestants, all of the arbitrary divisions people used to classify each other- all of these have faded into obscurity. All that's left is a vague sense of confusion over why people thought the divisions were important.
Second, anyone who tries to speak of "inferior" and "superior" races should be laughed out of the room. All races are not the same, but our similarities are overwhelmingly more important than our differences. Our defining quality as humans is our adaptability; this has nothing to do with skin color or traditional culture. Humans as a species are adaptable to every climate, every extreme condition that life throws our way. This has very little to do with our genetic differences and a lot to do with our capacity for altering our environment to fit our needs. To take a minor example, in my experience it seems that my Kenyan friends are more tolerant of extreme heat than I am, while I am more tolerant of extreme cold. However, I can visit deserts and they can visit glaciers- minor predispositions don't block us from living the lives we want to lead. As for why the geopolitical distribution of wealth and power looks the way it does, go read "Guns, Germs and Steel" for a better explanation than I can give here.
Third, putting aside the irony of an Australian afraid of colonization by other countries, his focus on Muslims seems misguided to me. Universally all the Muslims I have ever met and interacted with have been generous, friendly people. I don't think I'll ever understand why conservatives hate Muslims so much- these communities pray together quite frequently, church members avoid intoxicants, children do what their parents tell them... these are all the elements of the idyllic past conservatives wish to return to. Sure, there are angry young men doing stupid things in the name of Islam, but angry young men doing stupid things is also universal. Personally I think that after the end of the Cold War, American politicians decided that the country needed a new enemy and Muslims were more of a politically safe target than a real threat.
This brings me to my last point- what is traditional culture anyway? How would someone in my generation know? Technology has brought about such rapid social changes that we're still reeling from them. My life has more in common with a modern Chinese, Iranian or Kenyan computer programmer than it does with my grandfather's life or my great-grandfather's. All of us now make use of technologies that would have been unimaginable 20 years ago; our brains are quite literally altering to accommodate them. Traditional culture everywhere is eroding; the new culture forming is vast, unpredictable and incredibly exciting. By the population statistics that actually matter (literacy, infant mortality, access to education, global murder rate, etc.) humanity is doing an amazing job right now- we're winning so much that our only barrier to growth is ourselves. Personally I don't think it matters a great deal what people's skin color will be 50 years, 100 years or 1000 years from now. What matters more to me is the content of future generations' character- will they be unified under a common humanity or fragmented into competitive subcultures?
This is an incredible time to be alive- we now live in a global interconnected culture rapidly approaching a post-scarcity utopia. Virulent ideas such as those that motivated the Christchurch shooter cannot be simply censored out of existence; rather we need to inoculate against them. As that Middle-Eastern Jewish guy so deeply embedded in traditional Western culture said, "Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself" - this simple idea (mirrored and rephrased in basically every religion) is the vaccination against further terrorism. That statement is our traditional culture, that's our way of life, that's our common humanity and that's our answer to every social problem the Christchurch shooter warns against. Don't just blindly quote it- think through what it actually means, then live it.
Here are some completely unrelated puppies.
Comments
Post a Comment