I’m going to try something new this week: it’s called “blogging.”Blogging is a style of column writing in which I can write about manyideas in short “blogs.” I have to do it because I have lots to talkabout, and I needthe scatter-gun effect. This won’t be dangerous, though, because I,like the Israeli army, won’t target innocent civilians.
The word is finally out: I’m not funny. While I’m flattered thatan education graduate student (cue laugh track) would take the timeto point this out to me, I’m saddened that he missed the entiredisclaimer in my “Liberalia” article (“This is a satire, and I’mlaying it on pretty thick”). Perhaps reading is secondary to aneducation degree? From the looks of it, all you really need to knowis that “the Constitution was made for Whitey” and “conservativesdon’t believe in freedom.” Such a shame, the things our professorsseduce and trick these poor students into believing. That’sdefinitely not funny.
Turns out I’m “queer,” too! There was an ad rustling along thepavement today that said “Wear jeans on Monday, April 8, if you’requeer!” It was produced by the LGBTSU group, who also felt itnecessary to leave countless, Rabelaisian chalk scribblings on thethoroughfare by the Living/Learning Center. Well, as a straight adultwho doesn’t believe that “it’s all good” (one of the chalkinscriptions), there’s not much I can say besides, “I want all thischalk off my sidewalk before recess is over!” C’mon, folks, don’t youhave anything better to do? You seem to take your group prettyseriously, but do you really need to scribble on a sidewalk to raiseyour self-esteem? In the meantime, everyone reading this articletoday has cooties.
Finally, I’ve got to disagree with Joe Zarro’s Monday article(“Terrorists are human, too,” April 8). Joe’s my friend, and a niceguy, but civil people can disagree, and disagree I shall. I am,however, only disagreeing with his ideas, so he doesn’t need to worryabout me putting atomic hot peppers in his food. Or something likethat.
First, I don’t think that calling terrorists “evil” dehumanizesthem any more than calling Saddam Hussein a “malefactor” (Thesaurus:evildoer) dehumanizes him. History provides countless examples ofevil persons, but none need to be dehumanized by people who call them”evil.” These evil men did the work themselves. Eichmann isn’tdehumanized when Elie Wiesel says he’s evil; Eichmann is dehumanizedwhen we see the horror he wrought.
A Palestinian terrorist who murders innocent civilians is engagingin nothing less than evil. Sure, he’s also sick and deranged, butsick and deranged people are equally capable of evil acts. No matterwhat his motivations, the effects are still evil. I don’t know ofanyone who is saying that terrorists are genetically prone towardanything. What I worry about is people trying to rationalizeterrorism, or “explaining it away,” by turning “excuses for murder”into “reasons for discontent,” or some such malarkey.
Which brings me to another point: We don’t call terrorism evil sowe can sleep better at night; we call it evil because it is evil.There are certain things in the world that responsible, powerfulnations need to take care of. We are not making excuses or tellinglies to ourselves when we set out to fight wicked people who want tokill very, very many Americans just for fun; we can, after all, onlymake excuses if we’re wrong. Sometimes, doing the right thing canseem “simplistic” (the new European catch-all phrase). Everyone knowsthat, even at complex universities.
Meanwhile, I just don’t see how the world would be a better placeif we chose to ignore certain evil people. We can try to explain themaway and justify them, but they are utterly unconcerned with what wethink. We can even try to understand them, but I promise that wewon’t like what we find.
–Benjamin Abel is a social science senior and the senior opinionwriter for The Daily Aztec.
–This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of TheDaily Aztec. Send e-mail to letters@thedailyaztec.com.Anonymous letters will not be printed — include your full name,major and year in school.
