The Blunt Edge of Brutality

Religion, like language, is hard-wired into the human psyche. At their core, all religions are the same. Religion typically splits into two aspects: spiritual and political. The spiritual aspect of religion is straight forward. Its ‘signature’ is tolerance. It deals with questions regarding faith, God and eternity. The political aspect of religion currently draws most of our attention because it has the potential of affecting our immediate circumstances. The same is true for ‘isms’. We can say that man is in essence a religious animal. Or we can say man is in essence political. Both statements accurately reflect a singularity of the human condition.

While it is true that equating man’s spiritual nature with his political nature is paradoxical, the two are nevertheless inseparable. Mankind is most at ease when the political aspect of whatever his primary concern may be (as Alfred North Whitehead suggests) is benign. A wizened curmudgeon professing his belief in Marxism within the confines of an ivory tower suite is no threat to anyone. Man suffers when such concerns become militant as happened during the crusades and is happening now as militant Islam makes its moves.

The constant striving of religion is to reduce all the divergent aspects of life to one. People who may be several happy meals short of enlightenment do not recognize the essential oneness in what they see. They fail to make the connection that ties everything together. There are two ways to force the issue to its resolution. One is persuasion (proselytizing), militancy and violence; the other is tolerance.

Tolerance is the more difficult nut to crack. We have chosen the easy path. It is easier to lop off the heads of non-believers. It’s easier to ban conservatives from speaking at universities. It’s easier to call for jihad. It’s easier to cause havoc and break things, and then pick up the pieces of whatever is left and cobble these into a single atrocity based on the principle of exclusion. It is also easier getting people to submit.

We here in the West have chosen submission. Our enemies attack us and we submit. In order to rationalize our cowardice, we change the language. We blur the line between good and evil. We assume our enemy’s narrative and admit that we are at fault; that it is we who must adjust or even erase ourselves. Our mea culpas – and even our sacrifices - are flawed; it is only ego that speaks. We abandon our principles; our allies. We no longer tolerate ourselves.

This is the mindset of our current administration. It pays no mind to the violence, pain and dislocation that is certain to ensue. For them, all these comprise the necessary gateway through which we all must pass in order to achieve a more perfect union – the Utopia that is envisioned in James Hilton’s Shangri-La, in B.F Skinner’s “Walden Two”, in Pol Pot’s Cambodia, etc.

In today’s world the concept of tolerance has been all but abandoned. Political strife has taken its place. Unfortunately, just as religion cannot be exorcised from the human psyche, we cannot fight ‘isms’ with ‘isms’ and arrive at a good place. Religion has always been a double-edged sword. We have chosen the blunt edge of brutality.

The Whole Ball of Wax

There are really only two ways of looking at things – civilization, modernity, capitalism, politics, science and technology – in short, the whole ball of wax. In order to make a proper assessment, we must put it in perspective. Realize that this would apply only to humanity, a relatively small but, nevertheless, evolving part of what we regard as creation. Secondly, we must recognize all humanity as a single family, members of which are essentially predatory but each also painted with a broad streak of idealism that seeks to embrace eternity on his or her own terms.

The split (hence conflict) arises from a divergent premise: one, that assumes that such evolution has its limits and that we are rapidly approaching the end, that we must turn back at all costs; while the other rests secure in the faith that we can and must go forward by the grace of some higher being.

It came to mind last year, as I watched a bare-bodied Brahman man, dressed only in a loin cloth, rushing out of his gate and halfway into a Chennai street choked with vehicular traffic. There he stood bent but defiant, eyes wide, clearly confused and angry. He was soon driven back against the wall by the blaring horns of unyielding SUV’s and swerving motorbikes. I watched him as he gathered his rags and retreated beaten, back into his walled compound.

In India, where so many seek their sustenance on the top layer of multiple strata of (not yet cold) successive dynastical rule, the social tectonic plates sometimes shift to expose antiquity that is either struggling to catch up or that rejects any notion of what is termed ‘progress’ outright. The impulse is the same: feeling oneself out of sync with present day; spent and hopelessly inadequate, unable to cope.

In much of the world it turns to rage. The gap between rich and poor has grown too wide to be bridged by anything other than suspicion. The elders decide that the relentless bombardment of technological, political and social innovations must be stopped if the family is to survive. “We are being swamped,” they conclude. …and the source of all this evil inequity, of course, is always the lead horse: America.

Even within America itself, this divergence festers. Half the people advocate for free markets, free speech, freedom itself… while the other half is determined to shut it down. Interestingly, the reason given for the latter is to ‘save the planet’. Never mind that the science stinks. America leading the world over the cliff, they maintain, stinks as well. God is dead. We must save ourselves. We must at the very least allow time for the rest of the world to catch up. We must go back and find the lost sheep and bring back them into the fold.

With the whole world, and even with half of our own population, having lost faith in themselves, convinced that we have reached the end of the road, what chance do we - who still believe - have to forge ahead into new and exciting realms of discovery?

The state of our space program today is emblematic of the dilemma we face. The enthusiasm and imagination are still quite sufficient to conquer new frontiers. But it is being curbed by the faithless who insist on turning back. Eventually, even our spirit will yield to what defines the uninspired existence of animals.

Some claim that the human spirit will never extinguish. They point to art as being the next frontier. But even art is wholly dependent on an abundance of freedom and remains suspicious of the man with the plastic doggie bag stealthily following behind.