Is It Human Nature?

Go to the special Guestbook page
to read people's responses to Ben's 9-11 Rants!

October 8, 2001

Dear friends and fans,

If you haven't read the October 1, 2001 RANT, go here to read it, and then come back.

Today I want to give you some of the thoughts and motivations behind that rant:

Must we fight? Is there no alternative? This was the challenge I threw down in my last rant. People responded:

One correspondent wrote: "...nations have always waged wars for whatever reasons since recorded time..."

Another friend wrote: "...Maybe we need conflict. There is a Ying to the Yang. How can one survive without the other? How would we know the difference? Getting embroiled is human nature to some degree..."

My view is that we have always had the ability to conceive of alternatives. For some people, principles such as compassion, forgiveness, love your enemy, turn the other cheek, etc. are lofty ideals that are impossible to actualize in any substantial way. But there are many others who are committed to enacting those ideals, who see them as vital to gaining and preserving the peace and freedom that we all want. They should not be put down or deterred by those who hold a fatalistic view of life and history. I recommend the life and works of Martin Luther King Jr. as a rebuttal to that world view.

In any case, idealist that I may be, I am not living in a dream world. I can see that military action may be inevitable. The motivation behind my rant was the onslaught of jingo-ism and trash-talk that has passed through my e-mail, on my radio, and in the news since the attacks. (My Webster's defines "Jingo-ism" as "extreme chauvinism or nationalism, marked especially by a belligerent foreign policy." ) I understand the need for people to let off steam, express their anger, etc., but when it comes from such influential sources as congressmen, journalists and religious leaders, I begin to worry about how our top leaders will respond.

Aside from a few early mis-steps, Bush and his team have not catered to that crowd, so far. They have adjusted their language, and their actions to this point have been all I could have hoped for: clarifying our respect for Islam, seeking coalitions, organizing intelligence, building a case- these are the kinds of things I was asking for in my essay. Our leadership has earned my highest respect for how they have handled things. The political pressure and personal turmoil they are going through must be enormous.

I still am personally opposed to violence of any kind, but reluctantly concede that for the protection of a nation, it can become necessary. But even so, it should be carefully considered, and expressed in terms of defense, not hatred or revenge. It is a fine distinction to make, but I think it is our leadership's responsibility to make that distinction, and act in a way that respects the values and principles they are trying to protect.

I also concede that for some people, this distinction is too fine to see, but I believe the distinction must be made. This is deep philosophical territory here, and I am not the most eloquent spokesman for it. I will just say that I believe there is no need for any of us to think we need or have the right to seek revenge. We are not perfect or blameless, after all, not as individuals or as a nation.

I recognize that the record of history is not encouraging - but can we not look forward as well as back? I may be in the optimist camp here, but I have not been told or shown anything that would convince me to give up the effort to spread a message of unity transcending our differences. In an age of unprecedented dissemination of information, perhaps some wisdom can be passed along, too.

In closing, I again am grateful for all your comments, pro and con. Thanks for compelling me to question and clarify my views!

If you haven't read it yet, continue to the third and final rant in this series: "One More Time".

Go to the special Guestbook page
to read people's responses to Ben's 9-11 Rants!

Your comments welcome!