Ezra Levant’s Two Minute Hate
Ezra Levant was in top form in The Calgary Sun recently. Speaking of the so-called left’s approach to terrorism - which encourages a sophisticated understanding of the mileus that breed mass murderers like bin Laden and McVeigh in addition to a strong response to acts of terrorism - Levant says we are all ethno-centric, and that we don’t have an understanding of “Evil.”
Such a response does not understand the terrorists. To understand them is simple, if terrifying: Read their writing and listen to their speeches.
They want the world to be ruled by sharia law, where the only constitution is the Qu’ran. They want a theocracy, like Afghanistan was and Iran is, where infidels are killed, or kept in a state of submission, called dhimmitude.
Read Osama bin Laden’s speeches, not those of his lawyers and psychologists in the media. Like Hitler’s Mein Kampf, bin Laden is plain about his intentions.
There was no half way, no compromise, no win-win possible with Hitler. The Jews didn’t do any one thing in particular to him — he hated their very existence.
The West didn’t do any one thing to bin Laden that caused his hate — other than to live freely and outside his authority.
Sixty-five years ago, Britain understood Hitler was evil, and responded with Spitfires, not psychologists.
Here’s hoping Britain today has the same clarity of thought.
Levant, ever the simplifier in his role as Bush’s bellicose Mad Canadian Cow in the conceptual china shop, just can’t allow more than one possibility to exist in the same space (his cranium) at the same time, so it has to be boiled (in oil, according to the Inquisitional Christian idea of Evil he alludes to) down to one thing: they are capital E Evil. Yes, the acts of the terrorist bombers are acts of evil, but I won’t give them the benefit of such great metaphysical status as the capital E.
People around the globe are continually committing evil acts. They do so out of mis-placed belief that what they are doing is somehow good, not evil. They think it is good to bomb people to pieces without ever seeing their faces (London, Iraq). They think it is good to torture people and kill them in service of some greater goal (Iraq, Iraq). They think it is good to exterminate an enemy as quickly and as ruthlessly as possible (Iraq, Darfur). They think it is good to commit mass murder to make a political or religious point (JonesTown, New York, Panama City, Oklahoma City, Tokyo Subway, Srebrenica, Tiananmen Square, etc. etc.). And they achive this thought that their actions are good through one method and one method alone: the monovisual blunderings of men like Levant who can’t see a syllogism because it has more than one part. It is this very simplicity itself. This sheer dichotomization of the world that allows for the emergence of a certitude that reaches a peak of arrogance where triggers get pulled, timers get set, and people with far less certainty - and therefore far more modesty - die. They always die at the hands of the certain… or their agents.
So, what is the problem with just assuming your enemy is Evil and going from there? Well, you can be certain that your certitude is viewed with exact same certitude on the other side.
There is a difference between the black and white wor(l)d of Levant and Bush and the world of those of us who try to make sense of seemingly senseless acts. The difference is we see an end to the mirror-like dichotomy that has fueled so much violence through the twentieth century, and it comes through the engagement of the large majority non-violent populations of all countries in a global programme of the general rasing up of humanity. This stands in stark contrast to the go-it-alone pseudo-coalition of oil-robbers currently waving the banner of democracy and freedom while they build bases and cling to their sputtering, crude-feuled dreams.
No Ezra, the vast, vast majority of people are NOT Evil or even evil. Muslims stand terrified of these fringe lunatics who they DO NOT consider Muslims yet cower before because they have guns and bombs and not afraid to use them. They cower and wait for the day when they can stand up to them. There is a mistaken belief that bin Laden (Levant’s Goldstein Face of ALL Muslims who hate us) has popular support among all Muslims simply because many Mulsims hate America. This is simply not the case. There are some Mulsims who support the extreme ideology of bin Laden. Most hate America for other reasons, but that throws a wrench into the whole simplicity thing.
July 19th, 2005 at 2:41 pm
As I understand my faith there is no such a thing as Evil. Shadow does not exist it is the lack of light and hate is the lack of love. Survival of every creature depends on this love. People that on the outset seems to have a lot of hate contrary posses a lot of love. No doubt a love that is directed to themselves and their own kind.
Just because Levant uses the word ‘Evil’ does not make him a religious zealous ( it takes one to know one) or that he thinks all Muslims are like Bin Laden (he did not say that even said that). It seems the events of last 5 years have solidified our old positions. If you did not like US foreign policy now you don’t like them even more. If you did not like Islam now more reason why.
As in life when there is a calamity, it is for a reason. I often noticed if I don’t learn the lesson the test is repeated over and over until I learn to respond differently. Perhaps we can look at this turmoil as a learning opportunity. Look how nationalism that once caused the world into fires of war is now becoming a source of commerce, innovation and unity.
July 19th, 2005 at 3:53 pm
I agree with your comments on love and light.
Levant is a ideological zealot, which is the same as a religious zealot. I was one, I’ve known many, so yes, I can identify them in the wild
If you use the word Evil the way he does, it means there is something essential being discussed, which is the supreme contradiction of what we agree on regarding light and love. People cannot be essentially Evil. I can’t believe that to be the case based on what I have seen in the eyes of a child.
I see how we have moved beyond nationalism to achieve the larger unity you describe. We have taken down barriers, learned eachother’s languages, embraced eachother’s foods and, to some extent, customs and religions. Nationalism is fading. Extreme nationalism still correlates with the most violent countries, in my experience.