Allowing Syrian refugees into the country might be dangerous. It might even be stupid.
See? Common ground already. This is going to be no problem.
It's stupid and unsafe, just like running toward a burning car to rescue a stranger. Or leaping in front of a subway train to protect someone who's having a seizure. Or loving your enemy. Flip a flipping pig! Can you think of anything in this world that is dumber or more dangerous than loving your enemy? It's so stupid that only one of the world's religions asks its adherents to do it. Even the Buddhists are like, "My enemies can eat a bag of dicks". But, here we are, trying to live up to this idea.
W.W.J.D.?
This. This is W.J.W.D..
If you look back at the ground you've already covered at this stage of your life, one the emerging patterns ought to be that doing the right thing is usually not easy. I can't be the only one with this experience. Just about every regret I have comes from trying to skirt around something I should have done and forcing the substitution of some easier thing which I thought was good enough.
What tells me that we all agree that accepting the refugees is the right thing are the comments that begin with "I'm a Christian, but...", "I feel bad for them, but...", "I don't believe in prison camps, but..." are all overtures to statements that make people feel rotten about their country and themselves. You must have read that Gordon Sinclair editorial about America's generosity which got passed around after 9/11. And you must have felt that swell of pride... that rare feeling of basking in the admiration of someone outside of our own nation who marvels at our ability to do good even when it's not in our immediate self interest.
It's hard to feel good about a society when that society is primarily motivated by fear. The math behind this most current tidal wave of alarm doesn't justify it. The unspoken assumption is that we're reasonably safe now and we'll be much less safe if we let these people in. And I don't think either of these things is particularly true. The likelihood of one of the refugees themselves sets off a bomb because that was their whole a agenda the whole time seems as likely to me as someone setting off a bomb because we didn't let the refugees in -- or some domestic group of nuts setting off a bomb because we did let the refugees in. Some people just like bombs.
Trying to control that outcome by pretending to understand motivations and predicting human behavior is dropping a Plinko chip and calling your shot. It's pointless. If you remove the part where we are presuming to affect the behavior of our enemies, all that remains is the part where we get to choose the kind of people we want to be.
Less than two weeks ago, we all paused for Veterans Day and reflected on the nobility and selflessness of their service. When we honor their devotion, it's with one of two sentiments. Either it's, "Thank you for being brave, I wish I were as brave as you," or, "Thank you for being brave, because I don't want to be."
If nothing else, consider that the intent of the terrorists is for us to be so badly frightened by them that we change who we are and what we do. When a governor refuses amnesty, it undoubtedly brings joy and satisfaction to what we consider, without debate, to be the worst assembly of human beings currently drawing breath. And not to shine too crass a light on it, but... fuck that. Right?
I've had it with being afraid.
[Cursory research has revealed that thing about loving thine enemy being unique within Christianity turns out to be not so cut-and-dried. So, what I wrote about the Buddhists isn't true. But it was a lot of fun to type.]
See? Common ground already. This is going to be no problem.
It's stupid and unsafe, just like running toward a burning car to rescue a stranger. Or leaping in front of a subway train to protect someone who's having a seizure. Or loving your enemy. Flip a flipping pig! Can you think of anything in this world that is dumber or more dangerous than loving your enemy? It's so stupid that only one of the world's religions asks its adherents to do it. Even the Buddhists are like, "My enemies can eat a bag of dicks". But, here we are, trying to live up to this idea.
W.W.J.D.?
This. This is W.J.W.D..
If you look back at the ground you've already covered at this stage of your life, one the emerging patterns ought to be that doing the right thing is usually not easy. I can't be the only one with this experience. Just about every regret I have comes from trying to skirt around something I should have done and forcing the substitution of some easier thing which I thought was good enough.
What tells me that we all agree that accepting the refugees is the right thing are the comments that begin with "I'm a Christian, but...", "I feel bad for them, but...", "I don't believe in prison camps, but..." are all overtures to statements that make people feel rotten about their country and themselves. You must have read that Gordon Sinclair editorial about America's generosity which got passed around after 9/11. And you must have felt that swell of pride... that rare feeling of basking in the admiration of someone outside of our own nation who marvels at our ability to do good even when it's not in our immediate self interest.
It's hard to feel good about a society when that society is primarily motivated by fear. The math behind this most current tidal wave of alarm doesn't justify it. The unspoken assumption is that we're reasonably safe now and we'll be much less safe if we let these people in. And I don't think either of these things is particularly true. The likelihood of one of the refugees themselves sets off a bomb because that was their whole a agenda the whole time seems as likely to me as someone setting off a bomb because we didn't let the refugees in -- or some domestic group of nuts setting off a bomb because we did let the refugees in. Some people just like bombs.
Trying to control that outcome by pretending to understand motivations and predicting human behavior is dropping a Plinko chip and calling your shot. It's pointless. If you remove the part where we are presuming to affect the behavior of our enemies, all that remains is the part where we get to choose the kind of people we want to be.
Less than two weeks ago, we all paused for Veterans Day and reflected on the nobility and selflessness of their service. When we honor their devotion, it's with one of two sentiments. Either it's, "Thank you for being brave, I wish I were as brave as you," or, "Thank you for being brave, because I don't want to be."
If nothing else, consider that the intent of the terrorists is for us to be so badly frightened by them that we change who we are and what we do. When a governor refuses amnesty, it undoubtedly brings joy and satisfaction to what we consider, without debate, to be the worst assembly of human beings currently drawing breath. And not to shine too crass a light on it, but... fuck that. Right?
I've had it with being afraid.
[Cursory research has revealed that thing about loving thine enemy being unique within Christianity turns out to be not so cut-and-dried. So, what I wrote about the Buddhists isn't true. But it was a lot of fun to type.]
No comments:
Post a Comment