"others"
I wrote the previous post yesterday but then decided not to post it on this blog. Mostly, I think, because I was a bit angry towards the end of it and said things in a way that I usually don't. I changed my mind and went ahead and posted it. It's not a big deal either way, but I figured it was okay and perhaps a good way to deal with some of those feelings.
I'm getting sick and I should have gotten to bed earlier last night. And not drank some beer last night. I met with a friend that I worked with a bit on archaeology projects and we drank a bit and talked. It was a really good discussion about humans, early modern humans, culture, societal norms, all that good stuff. We come at things a bit differently but listen to each other and this process helps both of us come to better understandings of how we see the world.
This actually is making me think of the people who insist on celebrating Columbus (and including Indian killing cavalry and conquistadors in the parades--an intentional message to Indian communities and individuals who oppose the celebration and what it represents). I wish people could sit down and recognize each others reasons for their beliefs. For some reason, there is a small group of people who insist on celebrating Columbus even though they know it causes hurt to other people; in fact, this is intentionally part of the celebration (cavalry, conquistadors, "you lost, get over it").
Why won't these folks let it go and choose instead to celebrate Italian-American pride, which could certainly include historical persons, if that is something important to people (Galileo Galilei, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, to name a few)? There is something to this continued desire to not back down; perhaps in their eyes changing the celebration to something more fitting would be to "lose." It makes me feel that the people who want Columbus Day and the parade and who very much make it a celebration of conquest, must feel disempowered themselves. One way in which to counter this feeling of disempowerment is to wield power over another. Maybe that is part of the dynamic at work. What will it take for people to listen to one another and recognize their hurt, recognize and validate their experience?
This question reminds me intensely of Israel/Palestine. I once read a book that included a small section about a camp at which Palestinian and Israeli youth met one another and camped together. There was not a lot of deep progress towards understanding and acceptance until individuals began to recognize the suffering and pain of the other--until this pain and hurt was acknowledged and understood as real and significant. In no way is this a comparison of pain and suffering--that is pointless in the scope of simply understanding the humanity of another and validating their experience.
And this happens. It happens between Israelis and Palestinians. It just doesn't happen enough. And states try to make sure of that because it is the only way to continue down the path of destruction and oppression that so many states travel. For example, if we here in the United States had this sort of dialog with Iraqi people, on a large enough scale, we would not invade, occupy, and kill Iraqis. And vice versa. Hence, all of the emphasis on "othering." These people (whoever they might be--the scenario changes but the methods remain) are simply different, maybe they are "crazy" or obsessed with religious perspectives. Maybe they are savages (is it any coincidence that enemy territory in Iraq is called "Indian" or "Injun territory" and what does this mean about the larger culture's view of American Indians?). Or maybe, as one man in an airport in Istanbul en route to Israel told me about Palestinians and Arabs in general, they are "animals; no, worse than animals. They are beasts."
A few days ago I watched a video of British soldiers beating Iraqi children. The kids had been throwing rocks at the soldiers, the soldiers grabbed several of the kids and took them inside a walled area. And beat them. The person filming the incident, another soldier, said things like, "Oh yes. You little fuckers. Die! Ha, ha, ha!" This commentary continued while the soldiers hit the youth with batons and fists and kicked them. You can clearly see one boy kicked in the genitals as he is held to the ground.
This is simply what happens, what always happens, when one group of people physically occupy another. This is what happens in Palestine. This is what happens in Iraq. I remember talking to an old British man in his seventies. He told me that he served in the British army during some of their various occupations and it was the same thing; that it didn't matter what a person was like when they went into the situation--the dehumanizing occupation soon makes you see the other people as just that--some "other" that is less than you, less than human. And the abuses begin.
So, this is one long post. I intended to simply state that I decided after all to post the previous thoughts. Now, here I am, many words later. I guess that's what happens sometimes.
I'm getting sick and I should have gotten to bed earlier last night. And not drank some beer last night. I met with a friend that I worked with a bit on archaeology projects and we drank a bit and talked. It was a really good discussion about humans, early modern humans, culture, societal norms, all that good stuff. We come at things a bit differently but listen to each other and this process helps both of us come to better understandings of how we see the world.
This actually is making me think of the people who insist on celebrating Columbus (and including Indian killing cavalry and conquistadors in the parades--an intentional message to Indian communities and individuals who oppose the celebration and what it represents). I wish people could sit down and recognize each others reasons for their beliefs. For some reason, there is a small group of people who insist on celebrating Columbus even though they know it causes hurt to other people; in fact, this is intentionally part of the celebration (cavalry, conquistadors, "you lost, get over it").
Why won't these folks let it go and choose instead to celebrate Italian-American pride, which could certainly include historical persons, if that is something important to people (Galileo Galilei, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, to name a few)? There is something to this continued desire to not back down; perhaps in their eyes changing the celebration to something more fitting would be to "lose." It makes me feel that the people who want Columbus Day and the parade and who very much make it a celebration of conquest, must feel disempowered themselves. One way in which to counter this feeling of disempowerment is to wield power over another. Maybe that is part of the dynamic at work. What will it take for people to listen to one another and recognize their hurt, recognize and validate their experience?
This question reminds me intensely of Israel/Palestine. I once read a book that included a small section about a camp at which Palestinian and Israeli youth met one another and camped together. There was not a lot of deep progress towards understanding and acceptance until individuals began to recognize the suffering and pain of the other--until this pain and hurt was acknowledged and understood as real and significant. In no way is this a comparison of pain and suffering--that is pointless in the scope of simply understanding the humanity of another and validating their experience.
And this happens. It happens between Israelis and Palestinians. It just doesn't happen enough. And states try to make sure of that because it is the only way to continue down the path of destruction and oppression that so many states travel. For example, if we here in the United States had this sort of dialog with Iraqi people, on a large enough scale, we would not invade, occupy, and kill Iraqis. And vice versa. Hence, all of the emphasis on "othering." These people (whoever they might be--the scenario changes but the methods remain) are simply different, maybe they are "crazy" or obsessed with religious perspectives. Maybe they are savages (is it any coincidence that enemy territory in Iraq is called "Indian" or "Injun territory" and what does this mean about the larger culture's view of American Indians?). Or maybe, as one man in an airport in Istanbul en route to Israel told me about Palestinians and Arabs in general, they are "animals; no, worse than animals. They are beasts."
A few days ago I watched a video of British soldiers beating Iraqi children. The kids had been throwing rocks at the soldiers, the soldiers grabbed several of the kids and took them inside a walled area. And beat them. The person filming the incident, another soldier, said things like, "Oh yes. You little fuckers. Die! Ha, ha, ha!" This commentary continued while the soldiers hit the youth with batons and fists and kicked them. You can clearly see one boy kicked in the genitals as he is held to the ground.
This is simply what happens, what always happens, when one group of people physically occupy another. This is what happens in Palestine. This is what happens in Iraq. I remember talking to an old British man in his seventies. He told me that he served in the British army during some of their various occupations and it was the same thing; that it didn't matter what a person was like when they went into the situation--the dehumanizing occupation soon makes you see the other people as just that--some "other" that is less than you, less than human. And the abuses begin.
So, this is one long post. I intended to simply state that I decided after all to post the previous thoughts. Now, here I am, many words later. I guess that's what happens sometimes.
posted by matt iv at 9:54 AM
2 Comments:
A few things.
Columbus day is bullshit - I can't believe it is still celebrated in this country.
What was your response to the man in the Istanbul airport - and what was his reason?
I can't imagine a grown man beating a child - that is horrible.
I hope he (they)recieved some sort of punishment for it.
I didn't really respond much to the man at the airport. He was assuming I had never been to Israel or Palestine before (and I actually had a year earlier), and I was interested in finding out what he told me from that perspective. Plus, I find it pretty hard to even maintain a verbal dialog with someone so overtly racist.
What was his reason? He was racist. He lived in the United States and visited Israel often (every year it seemed); I think he said he had some family he visited there. He wouldn't even call Palestinians Palestinian. Instead he referred to Arabs while actually meaning the Arabic people of Palestine--Palestinians. I think it is very likely that he, like others I have heard, doesn't believe Palestinians are real.
There are people who maintain that what is now Israel (and the West Bank and Gaza) were empty of humans before Zionist propaganda encouraged people to move there. In fact, some of the propaganda were advertisements that read "Palestine: A land without people for a people without land." Of course, this is absolute nonsense, regardless of one's political and social paradigms. There is a reason for the millions of Palestinian refugees--they were kicked out of their homes and their land.
In the newspapers in Israel, I read just such comments and arguments--that there is "no such thing as Palestinians;" that "they should move back to Jordan," meaning that there never were Palestinians but actually Jordanians who just happened to get in the way of Israeli settlement. Other articles said that there would be no solution to the "problem" until all Palestinians were removed from Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank of Palestine.
I remember when I was staying in the village of al Juneid outside of Nablus in the West Bank. There is a community cemetery there and in the cemetery are tombs that are 1,500 years old. These are the ancestors of the people who still live in al-Juneid.
So, I guess the man's reason for his statement is that he is deeply racist. And part of that includes the objectification of Palestinians--dehumanizing them by calling them animals and beasts. In that way, it becomes easier to say they should be killed, "removed," or imprisoned in the city-like prison camps of Gaza and the West Bank.
Post a Comment
<< Home