Talking about Hasan reveals ugly racism
Image by AFP/Getty Images via Daylife
In the absence of enough information, what we see comes from who we are, how our minds work. Like the summer pleasure of naming what one “sees” in the clouds, we structure ambiguous information and in the process reveal who we are; one person may see in the clouds a richly embroidered family scene while someone else may grab hold of one little detail to see a ravenous crab, or maybe a sexual organ. Different people, different perceptions.
Because the facts are not yet in, current answers for why Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan went on his murderous rampage, including my own, are like gazing at the clouds. There is nowhere near enough information for anyone to have a data-driven opinion–not yet, not really. Today’s opinions actually reveal more about the mind of the speaker than the reality of Hasan’s motivation. In going beyond the information available we display our character.
Unfortunately, the character revealed includes a level of hateful, ugly, anti-Muslim racism that should have no credible place in American public life. How did such dangerous nonsense become acceptable? September 11th is no excuse. I saw the towers burn; worked at Ground Zero; tearfully walked with thousands through Union Square with a candle in a plastic cup the Friday after–like mourners at Fort Hood; and sat with widows, survivors, and first-reponders to witness their loss. None of it licenses the hateful racist rhetoric we see.
Brad Knickerbocker in The Christian Science Monitor wrote today about this unnecessary political dimension,
From one side, the alleged shooter — Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist — is a victim of “Pre-traumatic Stress Disorder” who flipped out because as a doctor treating combat veterans he had to deal with the horrors of an unjust war. From the other side, he’s a Muslim terrorist, an Arab (though born in the United States) plotting and carrying out his own murderous jihad.
via Fort Hood tragedy seen through personal political lenses | csmonitor.com.
Ken Eisold, a fellow psychologist writes how
… some conservative commentators, not waiting for evidence, have concluded that Hasan is a “trained terrorist.” An interview with Dave Gaubatz on Frontpagemag quotes him as saying: “Malik Nabal Hasan is a terrorist supporting the ideology of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and yes, CAIR.” (See “The Muslim Brotherhood and Ft. Hood.”)
via Ken Eisold – What You Don’t Know You Know .
In the absence of evidence, the hateful character of some on the right has been revealed. What we need to keep in mind now, before the information is available, is that everything being said is based on the same evidence as is finding a clown in the clouds. Information will emerge. An explanation will get developed. Some of today’s fantasies will be proved correct. But today what is being said are really just fantasies that reveal the character of the speaker. Being correct about vicarious traumatization having a role in Hasan’s motivation will not make my politics any more correct, nor would an eventual revelation of terrorist motives make today’s racism any less racist.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
You’ve quoted anti-Arab and anti-Muslim speech, but where does racism come in? Certainly Islam is not a race, and I don’t think Arabs qualify as a race – they’re Semites who can trace their ancestors back to a particular patch of ground in the Mideast.
Yeah, I went back and forth about this. I had used the term in an earlier post and didn’t feel 100% right about it then. Anti-Arab, anti-muslim didn’t seem to carry enough terminological weight. I thought about getting wordy, “virulent prejudice” or some such thing. Anti-semitic, which may have a certain accuracy wouldn’t work. But when I saw several Muslims quoted using the term “racism” I decided to stay with it. I hope that choice doesn’t detract from the message.
In response to another comment. See in context »Words have power and we need to respect their meaning. The trend seems to be to cry “racism” willy-nilly. It not only stifles debate (which might be the real agenda) but it vitiates the term, and after a while will make people less likely to react as strongly as they should when real racism occurs.
In response to another comment. See in context »If assuming someone is a terrorist because of religious/ethnic identity does not qualify as “real racism” in your thinking, is that because you don’t think it “real” or because it is not sufficiently powerful to warrant the term “racism.” Was anti-Japanese hatred in WWII racism? Anti-German?
People shouting “camel-jockey” or “hey rag-head” is not debate. Take a look at the exchange below between controlfreaks and golikehellmachine; isn’t that a fight about racism (rag-heads vs. average white male)? I agree with you about the power of words, but I think you’re stretching the meaning of debate to include people venting hatred while others try and damp that down.
In response to another comment. See in context »While I agree that there still exists “Real Racism” in this country and others, the level of respect that we show to those that deserve it is non-existent in this case. This person used some bullshit religious reason to execute 11 people and attempted to execute 30 more, all in some fanatic, religious crap for a god that doesn’t exist. He is not worthy of the respect that we show others to quell the names of hatred that seem to fly from the brain so easily. People are really tired of all of this crap, these killings in the name of whatever. He is a terrorist that was able to infiltrate our Armed Forces and he even got paid American tax dollars to do it.
In response to another comment. See in context »Controlfreaks, you had me up to your last sentence. Look, the guy is a mass murderer. My heart aches, as I hope does yours, for the victims and survivors coping with loss and injury.The reason to understand is NOT to excuse but to try and prevent more tragedies like this. But once you cross the line and go so far beyond the information available to talk about terrorism and infiltration–which today’s news makes even more unlikely–, well, at that point you are finding shapes in the clouds and revealing your prejudice.
We should listen to the Army Chief of Staff, General Casey, when he he expresses worry that speculations, like yours, could “cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers.”
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jill Harper, Tweets Tube. Tweets Tube said: Talking about Hasan reveals ugly racism http://bit.ly/1837A0 [...]
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, dresses like a duck, and makes statements to some god that these freaks believe in before shooting people, then guess what? It’s probably a duck. Now we all just want to know how our United States Armed Forces was infiltrated by a member of Al Qaeda. Racism my ass. I don’t see that anyone used the words, “rag-head”, or others of the like. But since this moron has no respect for human life in the name of some god that doesn’t exist, why should he be immune to whatever comes to mind?
Screw him! Hey rag-head, lets see how that god of yours helps you out in prison.
You know, you’re absolutely right. I think we should start profiling Americans based on the history of mass shootings in American history. So, as (I’m assuming) an average white male, get ready to start getting pulled over and searched on a regular basis.
Oh, and, as a matter of fact, Islam is by far the fastest growing religion in US prisons. So, you know, I don’t think he’ll have as much of a problem as, say, an average white male.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] good doctor has since penciled in another article, "Talking about Hasan reveals ugly racism", and I borrow his concluding paragraph in closing: In the absence of evidence, the hateful [...]
Mr. Essig, while I understand what you’re trying to say here, everyone in the United States today all has the same question. This particular group of people have already previously demonstrated that they are articulate, intelligent, and seem to know how to get to where they want to be, to be able to do as much destruction in such a short amount of time, all without detection to their real allegiance. This isn’t rocket-science here. Witnesses have already stated that he was screaming out the typical Al Qaeda war cries before he started taking innocent American lives. Once again, it’s a duck.
There are several issues at hand here in attempting to understand what has happened @ Fort Hood. First, with regard to Dr. Hasan being a psychiatrist who’s work was directly related to treating PTSD. As a mental health professional who worked for 12 years on the mobile crisis team in WA State, I can say with first hand experience that the reality of developing second-hand or “vicarious” PTSD is very real. What is at issue here, in my experience, is the perpetual reduction in funding of mental health services across the spectrum so that most crisis teams are in fact skeleton teams. One of the things that has happened over the last 20 years is the reduction of weekly clinical supervision for mental health providers. I am not privy to whether or not this is totally true for the military, but based on what I’ve read, I have to assume the same cuts occur there. Most mental health clinicians do their work day in and day out without any adequate release of emotion or the ability to develop understanding, via clinical supervision. What most people don’t know is clinical supervision, in its’ truest sense is about the clinician and what issues are arising as a result of their work. It’s not about developing newer strategies to deal with clients, but to develop strategies to deal with everything that arises in their personal psychology. With seasoned clinical supervision, there is a very good chance the issues that led to this outrageous slaughter might have been caught. But the reality is in America, we are much more comfortable paying money for the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, rather than for the guard rail at the top.
Second, I have to agree (with the content of this article) that most of what I have read in the news the last few days about Dr. Hasan is clearly pathological projection by people who are lost in fear, anger and helplessness. To automatically assume he MUST be some sort of secret agent who infiltrated our Armed Forces is simply unsophisticated. While he may have shouted God is Great, as reported in some news reports, this by itself does not support the contention he is somehow a secret member of Al Qaeda. People, any people of any race or creed or nationality will resort to the most base and often juvenile identity in a time of crisis. This is true for the Dr. who committed mass murder as it is for those who currently sit in judgement and assessment of his motivation for his actions.
While there is certainly much to be gained from thoughtful debate about the role of race/religion in coloring the analysis of individuals regarding the Fort Hood shootings, I’m more interested in the reasoning of people like controlfreak. The suggestion that Maj. Nadal was an Al Qaeda plant is shocking if you follow the logic through to its obvious conclusion.
That being the fact that with scant resources and nothing like a military/intelligence industry, Al Qaeda has not only successfully infiltrated the U.S. Army in the case of Maj. Nadal, but also the very highest levels of clandestine intelligence ops, in the case of Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi.
In contrast, the disorganized, competitive and politicized agencies charged with national/homeland security can’t even agree on watch lists, hire Arab Linguists or translate recorded surveillance indicating suspected threats in a timely manner.
I don’t believe these arguments would sway anyone like controlfreak, or even give them pause. I don’t begrudge folks the opportunity to play the role of the victim when “we” are so clearly the bully.
In my view, the so-called war on terror is not just the end of the 4th Amendment, the Bill of Rights and any standing we had left as a model for others to look two.
At $2 billion a week, largely going to no-bid contracts with Xe and whatever Halliburton is now called, the war on terror is the end of the economic engine that once got the global economy from point A to point B.
This isn’t mine but from something I read a few days back.
“We had to destroy our country in order to defend it.”
link to quote:
http://www.truthout.org/dont-call-it-a-defense-budget56598