Understanding Evil

Just when you think idiotarianism has hit its limit, someone steps up and proves you wrong.

First, the good news. In the wake of her remarks that she could imagine herself becoming a suicide bomber, the British Liberal Democratic Party still has enough sense that they've asked MP Jenny Tonge to step down as their spokeswoman for children. (Hat Tip: reader Elaine)

Spokeswoman for children. Such times we live in.

When even the often-addled Lib Dems understand the problem, you'd think the issue would be pretty cut and dried. Yet my article's humourous jabs at both Ms. Tonge and her party's electoral prospects inspired not one but 2 idiotarian responses. Ross Judson's reply post reads like a conservative's parody of bleeding-heart liberals, full of 'understanding' for the suicide bombers and refusal to judge. Alas, it's no parody. The other respondent, Andy, actually believes that it's perfectly legitimate to blow up grandmothers in the streets - and says so directly.

I wish I was making that up. As you can see, I'm not.

I'll restrict this post to Ross' views, however, because I believe we may have enough common ground to make discussion useful. It will also enable me to lay the foundations of an important argument, and show the linkages between a distressingly common worldview and the scandalous moral vacuum of a Ms. Tonge. Andy, in contrast, will be saved for tomorrow's Idiotarian Watch. By his own words shall ye know him.

Cue the standard leftist litany from Ross Judson, of the aptly-named Ministry of Minor Perfidity. First in our comments section and then on his blog:

"If a man is without hope, full of anger, fueled by religious fire, I can see where suicide bombing is something that would be a consideration. Right now I don't think it's something I could possibly ever do, personally, but I think I understand the objective factors that would lead to it."

...Here's what really bothers me about such knee-jerk "you're a terrorist too" responses. We all sit here living with our shiny veneer of civilization, working hard at our information technology jobs, driving our SUVs, and cluck-clucking at the foibles of those crazy foreigners from the televised comfort of our suburban living rooms. If you're someone surrounded by that kind of comfort and you pass judgement on someone else because terrorism is "inconceivable", you're forgetting one thing:

You don't know what you'd do if you were in the same situation. We all want to believe that we wouldn't do it. It's inhuman, it's inconceivable, it's abhorrent. Not a chance…. But I'm not going to pass judgement on those who try to understand, when doing so means pretending that I know my true self, when faced with the same situation."

So, the main difference between Mr. Judson and Ms. Tonge is that she's pretty sure she could do it, while he's not sure. Lovely. Ross goes on in a later comment:

"Joe, you don't seem to be able to draw a distinction between the words "understand" and "condone". I can objectively understand the factors that lead to an action I do not agree with. For each of those factors, I can decide whether I believe it to be justification, or not."

Ross, I don't draw the distinction because Ms. Tonge clearly doesn't, and frankly I wonder about you too. Your post reads like a parody of the bleeding-heart liberal position on crime as extended to terrorism, and its effect is to remove the moral equation from discussion via "understanding" that quickly turns into "judge not" without even breaking stride. Blowing up grandmothers, children and other innocents as a matter of calculated, deliberate policy is not an unadulterated mortal evil to British MP and Party Spokeswoman for Children Jenny Tonge. No, it's "understandable."

And so she refuses to judge the suicide bombers, just as Ross refuses to judge her. Morality? Standards? Requiring that others live up to them? Never heard of it.

This attitude is worse than wrong.

If acts really are " inhuman… inconceivable… abhorrent…" then their moral content remains regardless. Whether or not you could be persuaded to commit them is irrelevant. To say "judge not" in response to acts of evil provides cover and implicit endorsement for those who promote and commit those acts, by removing them from moral sanction. One becomes, in short, an enabler.

I'm sorry if you find that word unpleasant, Ross, but it's accurate.

Suicide bombers, NKVD officers in Lubyanka, concentration camp guards - all have or had their excuses and justifications. So what? The truth is that there's no excuse, no justification adequate to their acts. The only way to use the word "understandable" in conjunction with their actions, is to believe that excuses exist in the first place. Ross, you said it yourself when you used the words:

"… For each of those factors, I can decide whether I believe it to be justification, or not."

If you're sitting there deciding in this case, then you concede there are factors you would consider to be a justification for suicide bombing. If there weren't any, after all, you wouldn't have a decision to make. Would you?

The difference between us here is that I don’t have a decision to make here - and you, apparently, do. Hence the responses that so distress you, from people who perceive these links even if you yourself do not.

"Of course, I'm not condoning..." says the familiar ritual tone. Yet this obligatory preface of disintersted understanding is often less than believable. Ms. Tonge seems unwilling to extend the same courtesy of 'understanding' to the Israelis, for instance, but they're just Jews so it's par for the course. Mr. Judson's political opponents right here also seem to be another story. As Mary summed up so neatly later in the discussions:

"Ross - You don’t know anything about Qtub, you haven’t researched the motivations of the suicide bombers, you don't know about their philosophies or beliefs – but you know that people like me are fuel "for that fire".

I dunno, Ross - are you sure you couldn't be pushed into the same position? Maybe it's all understandable.

Such a pity that Mr. Judson's desire for 'understanding' doesn’t seem to extend to a point that might actually be constructive. Unfortunately, without that kind of deeper grounding, what's left is little more than a cocktail of chance impressions, projection, and political prejudices loudly expressed. "Know Thyself," indeed.

To use the word again: enabler. That's what MP Jenny Tonge is - and a line that you, Ross, are treading very close to. Jenny Tonge, MP, is simply an extension of your stated worldview, not a departure from it.

That ought to disturb you. Someone raised outside of a systemic environment of hatred, with all of her advantages and privileges, implicitly sanctioning the deliberate murder of children by implying that it might be OK under current circumstances... and all this as a Spokeswoman for Children in Britain's Parliament.

"But who's to judge?" you say.

Who, indeed. At least the Liberal Democrats retained enough good sense to still value judgment, and to exercise it. A terrible pity, sir, that you did neither. I fervently hope that you might take some time, and give the matter some thought, and reformulate your position.

UPDATE: Ross Judson responds. Let's just say that I don't see a lot of rethinking going on.

All rights reserved. This article can be found on the Internet at:

http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/understanding_evil.php

Persons wishing to contact the author of this article for reprints etc. should put a request in the Comments section, or send an email to "joe", over here @windsofchange.net.