American Violence & Political Discourse

Share

This past week, comedian Kathy Griffin received much criticism and lost numerous business contracts due to a video she posted of her holding up a fake severed head made in the likeness of Donald Trump.  Many people on both the political Right and Left (rightfully) condemned Griffin's actions. Trump himself tweeted about how the images were disturbing to his children, especially his 11-year old son.

Kathy Griffin and Donald Trump

However, for anyone paying attention, much of this criticism seems a bit hypocritical because Griffin's video is merely the symptom of a larger problem in our society. Were the images Griffin posted offensive and disgusting? Definitely. But, it's also disgusting how often we tolerate such violence on behalf of our political party or our nation.

The truth is violence has always been embedded in American culture. Our nation was forged in the fires of violent revolution, and ever since then we have found ways to sacralize the myth of redemptive violence. We even have national holidays that strip away the ugliest parts of war and serve the public a cleaner version of "honor" and "valor." Looking at our history, we not only spend the most of any nation on our military (more than the next 8 nations combined or about 37% of the world's total military spending), but our country has also been at war for 224 of our 241 years of existence. We truly are a military-warrior nation.

But violence not only permeates the national stage, it also infects our homes. In American, 1 out of 4 women and 1 in 7 men will experience severe physical violence from an intimate partner or loved one at some point in their lives. Furthermore, this is not just a problem for any single demographic. Domestic violence cuts across all demographic markers--rich/poor, all ethnicities and races, urban/rural, educated/uneducated.

We even see violence infecting the world of sports. Much good work has been done recently on sports and the "warrior culture" within athletics that often fosters violence. Athletes, especially males, approach games as "battles," wear UnderArmour, and celebrate hyper-masculinity. Fans likewise get into the action wearing body paint like warriors, organizing themselves into tribes, and cheering on the events below. Some sports, such as football and hockey, have violence inherently built into the game. And who doesn't love to see a good hit or tackle in these sports? Sure, we might criticize the Romans for their gladiatorial games, but is the heart of our celebrations of violence in our arenas (and the insane amount of money we throw at them) really all that different simply because it's less bloody?

The point is, we cultivate a culture of violence everyday. We could go on to mention other examples. Violent video games, violent movies, violent language, gun culture, news that highlights murders and terrorism. This is the air we breathe and the water we drink.

So, it's no surprise that violence has infected our political rhetoric as well. Kathy Griffin was not the first, but simply the most recent example. Some of Griffin's most fervent critics were Trump's own supporters. However, there's a certain hypocrisy in this as these same individuals often tolerated (and sometimes endorsed) the violent discourse used by Trump during his candidacy. Trump frequently talked about assaulting protesters, argued we should kill even the wives and children of terrorists, and had to deal with a video where he bragged about sexual assault. Trump's violent rhetoric has spurred violence among some of his supporters as well, with one judge even stating Trump may be partially to blame for violence at his rallies.

And Trump isn't the only politician to talk about or use violence in recent months. During the campaign season, Joe Biden made remarks about wanting to "take [Trump] behind the gym," an allusion to physical violence not all that different from Trump's drooling over the "good 'ole days" when you could "just punch" someone you didn't like. Just late last month, a Republican congressional candidate was cited for assaulting a reporter just a day before the election. And yet, such violence did not seem to bother voters as he still managed to win his congressional seat. Likewise, following Trump's victory in November, a number of anti-Trump protesters started violent riots.

As we examine the use of violence in our political discourse, it's evident that violence is a problem for both sides of the aisle. This is because violence begets more violence. We see this phenomenon over and over. Police brutality and violence spurs violent riots. Wars against terrorism fuels more terroristic extremism. As Jesus said, "Those who live by the sword, die by the sword."

But, an interesting fact is that such violence in political discourse is not altogether new. Despite the fact that many feel like our country and our politics are going up in flames, the truth is we've always had violence in our politics. As mentioned earlier, our country's very inception was in violent revolution and rhetoric. And, throughout American history, our politics and political figures have always been marred by assaults and assassinations. We've even fought a war among ourselves over political differences.

In 1856, Senator Preston Brooks assaulted Sen. Charles Sumner in the U.S. Senate building.

Why is this? I suspect it is for the reasons given above--that we are a culture surrounded by violence and in love with violence. Such violence tends to become more extreme when we also throw in the forces of political polarization and hyper-masculinity/patriarchalism, but the seeds of violence are always there because it's embedded in our culture's DNA.

For Christians, this should be disconcerting as followers of a man who preached "blessed are the peacemakers" and who demonstrated that the way to overcome evil is not through utilizing violence, but through compassionate sacrifice.

To overcome this culture of a violent political discourse, Christians cannot wait on their politicians. We must start this work themselves. We must begin to replace the myth of redemptive violence with the truth of sacrificial love. We must listen more to the values of the Kingdom of God rather than to the values of the nation of America. We must heed the words of peace from our Lord and Savior, rather than the siren call of strength and power offered by our culture.

Calling out the violence of the "other side" is not good enough and often just feeds polarization. We must be willing to also name violence within our own tribe and party. And even harder, we must be willing to take a hard look at our own lives and confess the ways in which we participate, tolerate, and advocate violence in our day to day routines. Most of us don't assault others, but we do all fetishize violence in various forms, benefit from war, have misaligned concepts of "justice," use violence or aggressive language, and otherwise allow violence to sneak into our lives in countless other ways. Until God's people can learn to be a "people of peace" and teach others to do the same, we will continue to see (and support) a violence political discourse.

Share

September 12th

Share

Yesterday, our nation marked the 15th anniversary of September 11th, arguably the worst national tragedy since Pearl Harbor.  Across the country memorial services remembered the lives lost and the heroic acts of bravery. Since September 11th fell on a Sunday this year, many church congregations also joined in the remembrances or had patriotic services.

During many of these services and memorials, as well as on social media, we saw and heard the refrain that we must "Never Forget" 9/11. Now, if we take that sentiment seriously, the task of remembering 9/11 and the accompanying lessons begins today--Sept. 12th. After all, with any holiday or remembrance, the temptation is to forget and move on starting the following day.

However, the challenge with all of this is that the patriotic anthem of "Never Forget" is a bit more ambiguous about what we should remember. At the surface level, we obviously are to remember the event itself, but below the surface many other statements also ask to be believed and remembered. Intertwined with these memorials, we are invited to believe many possible messages: America is the greatest nation ever; America deserves our allegiance; Islamic terrorists should be destroyed; Muslims are evil; an eye for an eye; we need a strong military... On and on the list could go.

However, I think one message we actually should take away from this concerns the topic of Evil. No one will disagree that 9/11 was an "evil" day. The loss of nearly 3,000 innocent lives can be described in no other way than as "evil." But we as Americans have a strained relationship with the concept of "evil."

On the one hand, we often live our lives as if evil does not exist in our world in any significant way. This is largely due to the enormous amounts of security, stability, and prosperity we enjoy here in America. We don't go to work worrying about whether or not our family will be safe at home or if we will make it home from work. We are wealthier than the vast majority of the world. We live under a government that grants us countless freedoms and is far less tainted by corruption than most other counties. This is partly why the events of 9/11 were so shocking. We were not used to encountering evil, and suddenly evil came busting down our front door to stare us in the face.

On the other hand, we are sometimes too quick to use the label of "evil." In the aftermath of 9/11, our politicians, pastors, and pundits rushed to label the terrorists "evil," to call the nations associated with terrorism "evil," to describe an "axis of evil," and in some cases to identify Islam itself as an "evil" religion. Outside of dealing with terrorism, we thrown around the term "evil" in many other careless ways. We label opposing political parties and candidates as "evil" or speak of voting "for the lesser of two evils."

I suspect these two tendencies are related. We live a privileged life divorced from many of the harsher evils that run rampant in our world and are therefore shocked when a powerful evil strikes us. Likewise, since we are often shielded from horrific evils, we are confused about how to rightly apply the label and either attach it to everything we see or flippantly apply it to people or programs with whom we simply disagree. Unfortunately, such an aversion to and discomfort with evil results in poor decision making when true evil rears its ugly head in our midst.

This is perhaps one of the most important lessons we can take away from 9/11. In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, the nation was brimming over with powerful emotions--fear, anger, a desire for revenge. Out of this emotional milieu, President Bush declared a "war on terror" a mere 9 days after the attacks, covert troops were inserted in Afghanistan 15 days after the attacks, and bombings and a formal invasion of another nation were initiated less than a month after 9/11.

Although some good came out of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (such as greater freedom and rights, as well as better infrastructure for certain cities), it cannot be disputed that these wars caused just as much evil as the initial terror attacks themselves. While Al Qaeda killed 3,000 innocents on 9/11, the war in Afghanistan killed 3,500 innocent civilians in 2015 alone. As of March 2015 an estimated 210,000 civilians had been killed as a result of these two wars. They were killed by terrorists and insurgents, but also by American and coalition forces. They died as the result of bullets, bombs, poor health, loss of shelter, and starvation. Other estimates place the number in Iraq alone as high as 500,000, although these numbers are almost impossible to know as the U.S. government and military tends to refrain from keeping or releasing such numbers on the civilian costs to these wars. Add to that the roughly 1.5 million refugees from Iraq and 2.5 million Afghan refugees, and the human cost is staggering.

Additionally, after 15 long years of war against terrorism, we have come no closer to preventing or defeating terror than when we began. In fact, the situation today may be worse. The war in Iraq helped create a power vacuum, ignite sectarian conflicts, radicalize new terrorists, and throw the limelight of international attention onto extremists who previously would have had little or no following. All of these facts have culminated in the rise of ISIS--perhaps a bigger threat to both the U.S., Europe, and the entire region of the Middle East than Al-Qaeda ever was.

In hindsight, the problem should appear obvious--we were shocked and angered by evil, and chose to respond poorly in a knee-jerk manner. We demanded blood for the blood of victims that was spilled. And when the Taliban refused to hand over bin-Laden, we foolishly decided that we could defeat evil with bombs and bullets.

But here is the lesson those who are Christians should take away from our memorial services--we cannot defeat evil with violence. We cannot bomb evil into non-existence. We cannot kill enough people to make evil submit.

I will not go so far as to say that war or violence can never be justified, but I will say that we ought to be more wary of such calls in the aftermath of tragedy. Evil is a siren call that deceives us into perpetuating more evil under the banner of "freedom" and "justice." This temptation is exacerbated by the narratives of patriotism, nationalism, and civil religion that usually accompany such tragedies and attacks.

For Christians, when we find ourselves staring into the face of evil, our first response should be to gaze upon the cross--the greatest evil of all time. For it is the cross of Jesus that dealt with evil once and for all. For thousands of years humans have devised methods of overcoming evil, but none of them have succeeded. Only the life, death and resurrection of the Son of God actually responds to evil in a meaningful way. The true answer to evil is found at the cross, and our responses to evil--both individual and national--should be informed by that event.

The cross also reminds us that the world cannot be divided into "good" and "evil." As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote, "the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being."  In the wake of 9/11, our nation dubbed our enemies (ideologies, individuals, and nations) to be "evil," while at the same time presenting our own cause as righteous, just, and good. But the truth was so much more complicated. One reason for Islamic terrorism relates back to American imperialist tendencies in the Middle East going back decades, actions which radicalized numerous Muslims and Arabs. During the post-9/11 wars, we have killed innocent civilians, ignored the sovereignty of nations, and committed war crimes including torture. Now certainly we are not as bad as the barbarous individuals who carry out intentional, heartless attacks on civilians, but we must be honest and admit that we are not innocent or blameless either.

Focusing on the cross reminds us of that truth because Jesus died for the sins of all. He died because all of us have evil within us. He died because institutions, nations, governments, and places of power often become "possessed" by evil and commit atrocities. Simultaneously, the cross not only exposes our own guilt, but also illumines an alternative, counter-cultural way of responding to evil.

So how ought we to observe Sept. 12 and beyond? I suggest we do so by remembering not just 9/11, but also by remembering the cross. At the cross I am reminded that evil is constantly present in our world, so I should not be shocked by it. At the cross I am reminded that Jesus has dealt with and will deal with evil, so I can have hope. At the cross I am reminded that there are things worse than physical death, so I am not driven by fear in the face of evil. At the cross I am reminded that Jesus chose love, mercy, and sacrifice as the primary tools for overcoming evil; He did not buy into the myth of redemptive violence. So yes, let's "never forget" 9/11, but more importantly let's "never forget" God's response to evils like 9/11--the cross.

Imagination for Construction

I just came across an article discussing the Air Force's new stealth bomber that is in development. Not much is known about the plane beyond the fact that it will be stealthier, have the ability to fly manned or unmanned, and will be able to drop bombs deep into enemy territory without detection. Oh, and we have this teaser photo released by the Air Force.

My initial reaction was to drool a little bit. As a kid I was always fascinated with the F-117 and B-2 stealth aircraft. They reminded me of something out of a sci-fi movie, but they were real planes. Couple that with my initial interest in aerospace engineering in high school and I found myself looking at the above pic thinking, "Sweet."

However, that sweetness also comes at a cost--$550 million A PLANE! The Air Force plans to build 100, which will bring the total cost to roughly $55 billion (and that's a conservative estimate).

This led me to step back and think. We are going to spend half a billion dollars (probably closer to three-quarters of a billion dollars when it's all said and done) for a single plane that's sole purpose is destruction. Because, at the end of the day, unlike troops themselves or many other aspects of our military that can be used for engineering purposes or nation building, a stealth bomber only really has a single purpose--to spy and destroy.

At this time, I don't want to get into discussions about just war, drone strikes, pacifism or the like. That discussion is always with us. And of course, we could get bogged down in whether or not our government is justified in spending that kind of money (to protect our security, to protect the world, to ensure freedom, etc.) But instead, I want us to focus on something else.

Rather than debating the rightness or wrongness of military force or of potential excessive government spending, I want to imagine an alternative reality. What could possibly happen in our world if the Air Force decided to build 99 of these planes instead of 100, and chose to donate the extra $550 million elsewhere? What else could that same money be spent on?

What if we used that money to build infrastructure and bring aid to the people of Syria and Iraq who are oppressed by ISIS? Might this undermine ISIS's legitimacy so we don't even need that bomber?

What if we used that money to address childhood hunger, either at home or abroad?  And not just throwing money at a problem, but using the money to actually research how to deal a death blow to hunger.

What if that money were used to bring thousands of people across Africa clean drinking water, or assistance to help with farm sustainability to reduce famine? After all, lack of food is a primary cause of war, poverty, and unrest in the region, and water-borne illnesses kill hundreds of thousands of people each year.

What if the money were used to redo city infrastructures in impoverished areas? Or provide funding to domestic violence shelters or child abuse centers? What if it were used to provide 0% interest loans to promising entrepreneurs and businesses that hold the potential to improve society and our world?

The possibilities are endless, and all it really costs the Air Force is 1 plane. Do we really need 100 of these machines in the world, or can we get by with 99? Can we sacrifice the lethality of one weapon to use the money to bring more peace and wholeness to our world than any single plane could destroy?

Of course, this will probably not happen. But I believe a key part of the Christian social ethic is imagination. We need to imagine a world that looks different than the status quo. We need to tap into the creative inspiration of the Creator Himself to imagine alternatives to violence, hate, racism, partisanship, and other evils that plague our world. We need to imagine because we are called citizens of a Kingdom that is slowly invading our world. If we fail to stretch our imaginations, then we will find ourselves giving into the narratives and logic of worldly powers.

So, what are your ideas. If the Air Force sacrificed one plane and handed you $550 million, how would you use it to build God's Kingdom and construct a better world?

The Coming Moral Test

The next few days and weeks will be a test for Americans, and particularly for those Americans who claim to follow Jesus. On Tuesday morning, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a 525 page summary of a much longer report on the abuses and interrogations of prisoners by the CIA. In short, the report illuminates the horrendous interrogation methods employed by the CIA. Furthermore, the report claims that the CIA misrepresented its actions and failed to glean any useful information from torturing its prisoners. You can read the executive summary here.

Even before the report was released there has been intense debate over the tactics and the release of the report. Three key areas of debate include whether releasing the report will endanger American lives overseas, whether or not the "enhanced interrogation techniques" should be considered "torture" and violated human rights treaties, and whether or not the "techniques" yielded any useful or accurate information in the war on terror.

The main "techniques" used in "enhanced interrogation" were water-boarding (near drownings), keeping prisoners naked and wet in cold cells for hours at a time, sleep deprivation (up to 180 hours), forcing prisoners to stand for hours on end, shaking prisoners violently, "wallings" (throwing them into a wall), and various slaps. The report also outlines how prisoners were threatened with a power drill,  sexually threatened with a broomstick, had their families threatened, forced to sit in ice baths, or forced to experience "rectal rehydration." Some results of these actions, according to the report, included convulsions, hallucinations, vomiting, and even death.

What grieves me as a Christian is how we as a nation seem so reluctant to admit that these types of actions are wrong. In all of the debate and discussion today, there was really no question that these events and interrogations took place. That much is certain. Rather, the debate heard on the airwaves and internet was over whether or not these actions were "legal" and whether or not they produced useful information that saved lives. For those of us who are Christians, this should deeply worry us, particularly if we claim to have any moral authority at all.

At the point where there is no longer a question over whether these interrogations took place or not, we should not even be asking whether they produced useful information in fighting terrorism. That is an irrelevant point. The ends cannot justify the means. To try and minimize the evil of what took place by saying that we gleaned information that saved lives is to walk down an immoral path blinded by pragmatism. Once we open that box, we invite in all kinds of other evils. As the people of God, we must firmly stand behind the Biblical (and, in this case, Constitutional) affirmation that all human life is valuable and carries at least a glimmer of the image of God. Therefore, all such cruelty done to others, even to our enemies in the name of "national security" is unethical and immoral.

Some might say that this is a necessary compromise in times of war (like killing innocent civilians in drone strikes), but to admit it is "compromise" or a "necessary evil" is still to admit that the action is evil and falls short of the vision for the Kingdom of God.

And so I hope that in the coming days Christians in America will rise up, denounce the torture, and say "never again!" But honestly, I'm not holding my breath. I'm not expecting that response because I also know that most American Christians are also blinded by American culture. I know that many American Christians obey the narratives and values of the empire of the USA rather than the Good News and ethics of the Kingdom of God ,to which they should be swearing their primary allegiance.

And since this is true, most American Christians will continue to value American lives as more important than the lives of others around the world. We will resist releasing all the details of the report because it might endanger "American lives." We will find nonsensical ways to justify the abuse and torture because destroying the lives of those prisoners doesn't really matter as long as we can maybe save some American lives. We will not only reject the claim of the Founding Fathers that "all men are created equal" and are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights," but we will also reject our Scriptures and our Savior which declare that God created humanity in His image and call us to "love our enemy."

Are we really so morally blind and bankrupt as to dance around the truth of what actually happened?

Yes, a moral test is coming, but I fear the American church will fail. Kyrie Eleison.