rip osama bin laden

For some reason, a large number of Americans seem to find the death of Osama bin Laden cathartic. Now, I'm no friend of islamic fundamentalism, and 9/11 has cast a long long shadow over my life and thoughts, but I have a hard time feeling anything other than ambivalence about Osama's demise.

For one thing, glee at the death of someone else, no matter how "evil," seems in poor taste. More significant, however, is the mistake of thinking Osama was the enemy, or the ultimate cause of 9/11.

9/11 was caused by ideas—the radical fundamentalist muslim idea that the murder of non-believers is permitted + the terrorist's central idea that creation of fear in one's enemy is a means of bringing about political change. If I'm going to feel some kind of catharsis about 9/11, if I'm going to feel "we did it!" or "at last!" or "victory!", then it's only going to occur when I see evidence we've done something to combat these ideas. Are there fewer people today who hate the US? Who think that violence against citizens of the US is both permitted and righteous? Who believe that the suppression of alternate belief systems is both permitted and righteous? If there's evidence to this effect, then I haven't seen it.

With respect to the death of bin Laden itself, the source of my ambivalence is uncertainty about the effect of his death, and the manner in which it was achieved, on the propagation of these dangerous ideas. Whatever guidance (financial, conceptual, or spiritual) bin Laden gave to al Qaeda and related terrorist elements, the fact of the matter is that terrorist acts require hardly any resources at all. Bombs can be built in the kitchen from household chemicals. The most important commodity for terrorism is willingness. If the (manner of the) death of bin Laden creates a greater willingness in potential terrorists to carry out violent acts / sacrifice their personal wellbeing in the name of islam, then it is not a victory, but a mark of increased danger for the American people.

Of course, I already think the real dangers of terrorist attacks are overblown—I'm not advocating public fear here or (heaven forbid!) increased security measures of any kind. The point is that this is a question we should be asking ourselves. If your glee at the death of bin Laden is simple revenge fulfillment, fine, I sympathize. But if you think it has somehow reduced the terrorist threat, lessened the influence of radical islamic ideas, or made America safer, then you presume to a far greater insight into the psychology of the muslim world than I do.

bathtubs

Anecdotal evidence, but...

Supposedly, the bathtub is the safest place in the house. If some kind of destructive event occurs (a hurricane, tornado, earthquake, whatever) the single safest place to be is the bathtub. This is because it is the most heavily shielded nook in the house.

Supposedly, the bathtub is the most dangerous place in the house. Statistically speaking, the most household deaths occur in the bathtub. Perhaps this is because it if a nook filled with water to which people go to relax—if that relaxation becomes too serious, whether because of overindulgence in some kind of relaxation enhancer or other

the culture of fear

In the 80's we were indoctrinated with fear of the impending nuclear holocaust. I remember seeing a musical composed and performed by passionate Soviet youths. They traveled the world performing their catchy songs and desperately pleading for change and action. The state of affairs now is quite different, and nuclear war with Russia no longer seems an immanent threat. But to what extent was this goal achieved by filling the minds of children with fear? And now, a new "threat" and a new program of indoctrination. Shouldn't we be giving our children skills rather than propaganda? In a society where even the highest echelons of government lack the ability to separate information from disinformation, surely this is the skill we need to impart to our children to "build a better tomorrow"? The culture of fear is likewise a culture of rash and irrational action.

the janus-faced party

We live in a one party system. With a single party there is no choice, and with no choice, no power. We call our party The Janus-Faced Party. Some men prefer one face and rally in support of that face with religious fervor. Other men prefer the opposing face and likewise rally in its support with identical enthusiasm. This illusion of conflict keeps the feeling of choice, the feeling of power and worth, alive in the common man. He stands too close to realize that the faces share a body. But if he took but a few steps back, and viewed his "democracy" with perspective, he would realize the unity behind these opposing masks. Oh, what then Janus-Faced Party, what then! Might he rally in the streets against both faces and stem the oncoming tidalwave of government "progress" with sheer collective force of will? Or would you, a colossus, merely crush him beneath your heel (as you have done so many times before)? In the safe warmth of my bed, late at night, before drifting into tortured dreams, I like to imagine you feel just a smidgeon of fear at the prospect. This is the wise man's palliative.