mánudagur, desember 06, 2004

Góða kvöldið

EFtirfarandi blogg er á ensku. Ástæðan er einfaldlega sú að ég var að skrifa bréf til Grapevine sem ég birti hér í heild sinni. Þetta kallast economisk skrif, það er að margnýta allt sem maður skrifar...

Dear Grapevine-lot

The editorial from mr. Nikolov was very entertaining as well as pressing. But I would like to add a couple of thoughts on the subject.

First: The "war on terrorism". No here we have a dandy. Terrorism became the focuspoint of global struggle when 19 (or so the story goes) "terrorists" flew comercial airplanes into the WTC in NY. Both the aggressor (in this case a bearded man living in a cave in Afganistan which soposedly goes under the name of Osama, and very surprisingly has been able to outmanuver the entire US led coalition for a better part of 4 years) and the defender (which goes by the name of George W. Bush, or Gorgy for those who know him, and currently commands the aforementioned US coalition) claim God (also known under aliases such as Budda, Allah, Jehove, the great spirit and strangly enough "The force") as their ally and protector. Now, for most of us normal folks this might strike as odd. How can the same "God" both want to "hunt down and kill" and "protect and guide" (and even throw in virgins) the same people? Either there must be two "Gods" or somebody made a blunder somewhere. I do not claim to know who George W. Bush talks to on the phone in the oval office or who hears Osama on the walky talky, but exluding that their guiding entety is a practical joker my educated guess would be that they are being scamed. Unless they hear voices but that is a whole different ballgame! This leads me to my second point.

Maybe we are looking in the wrong direction when we claim that what is going on in this so-called war on terror is a religious struggle? For what is really driving the struggle is the feeling of supremacy by one cultural world over another. The USA goverment claims to be "democrazising" the middle east but forgot to ask anybody in the region how they would feel about it. They claim to be doing something termed "nationbuilding" in Iraq and Afganistan but as any 15 year old, that has ever opened a history textbook, will tell you that such a thing is not only impossible but a contradiction in terms (for those slightly futher in their education the name Derrida pops to mind). "Nationbuilding" is something that takes place during a long time, through education and common cultural heritage. It is not something pulled out of a Pentagon hat and enforced by military might. Which then leads me my third and final point, the culturally complacent media.

When the war on Iraq (Finally a war that is real, it was on TV!) was fought the western media not only gullebly belived the humbedumbook evidence that the Americans offered the world but, maybe more seriously, did not question the cultural arrogance that the war presented and the termology that was to follow it. They were so imbedded in the "ground war" and the dodgy evidence that they never stopped to ask themself; is this right. Is it right that one cultural world goes about the place (and it not like history does not throw a couple of strong hints in the form of colonisation) presenting that they not only know best but that they have devine right to impose their culture on others? How could they miss the fact that some people actually find McDonalds backed by F16's on their land a bad and insulting idea? Were they perhaps locked in their little cultural box whose walls blocked their view? And if so, what needs to be done?

Well, that is a matter for a whole new article but to claim that what is going on in the "War on terror" is a religious war is far to simple and defers the focus from the really pressing question, that we need to take a good long look at our own culture before we start exporting it.

Best regards
Thorleifur Örn Arnarsson