Monday, November 23, 2015

Frankenstein's monster, or the hunter and the mosquito

The approach of some liberals toward violent actions like what happened in Paris last week (as I've heard on the radio, or read in progressive media), is something along the lines of :

"We've created this. We're just reaping what we've sowed."
"If only the people in power understood the implications of our foreign policy"

Basically, there is some temptation to view "us", or the West, as the creators of our own fate. "We" colonize the world, "we" deal with multiculturalism. "We" ghettoize a minority through poor urban planning, "we" must deal with the radicalism brewed in these communities. Modern violence is payback for centuries of colonial abuse. Some cannot help but view these events except by wrapping them up in the garb of liberal white guilt.

There is some truth to this. There probably is a really complex net of causes to current events. "We" have indeed contributed to the rise of radical Islam and terrorism through funding by the CIA of radical fighters in Afghanistan, financial aid to Saudi Arabia, etc.

But this feeling of "we've created a monster" is evidence of something else, other than perspicuity. It is evidence of a feeling of paternal responsibility for shaping the world. Dr. Frankenstein had to be able to create his monster before he could be held accountable for its actions. As the "creator" and "father" of a beast that does not know its own strength, that wants to be loved but is shunned by the world, we the reader find ourselves willing to exonerate the monster. We feel that we need not hold the monster to the same standard of behavior as Frankenstein, who really should have known better. We still view the actions of monster as the unfortunate mistakes of a clumsy child. We deny that the monster has agency or the capacity to control its actions.

We similarly infantilize the Muslim community in Europe, or in the Middle East, when we put the onus of radical Islam on the shoulders of "the West".  We are basically asserting that the Muslim community does not have the capacity to govern its own actions - it is just another clumsy monster that can't express itself without violence.

It may or may not be accurate. Regardless, it is evidence of incredible privilege. It is evidence of a culture that has become so adjusted to a position of authority that to suggest that some group just wants to destroy them to reap advantage seems preposterous. It is like the hunter gently swatting mosquitos, or maybe even just coming to terms with the fact that mosquitos need to drink a little blood.

But if that hunter were to face another hunter, then the self-delusion of supremacy would be a huge mistake. It would be a mistake to not regard the enemy as cunning, as daring, and just as thirsty for power as "our" imperial predecessors. There comes a point when it is no longer appropriate to coddle the enemy with paternalism, a point when the monster must be engaged on its own terms.

When a culture is adjusted to a default position of easy authority, the cunning enemy may just slip them out of the driver's seat without them even knowing it. Culturally, Europe still doesn't realize it isn't driving anymore. It's been in the back seat since the Second World War.