The Teabagger-Waziristan Confluence
Since the advent of the "War on Terror" the abuse of prisoners has only been rivaled by the abuse of language. Just as top-down notions of "terrorism" mean little more than "homicidal foreigner," "enemy combatant" is anyone who might now or someday be considered a threat, and being a "patriot" means letting your government do whatever it takes to protect our freedom from the enemies--even if that mean taking our freedoms away.
Whether we accept it or reject it, I think this black-means-white Orwellianism makes us all a little crazy one way or another.
This is not an attempt at armchair war strategy, but a theory that our persistence in spreading democracy is an easily rationalized one that becomes twisted into an excuse to levy our influence in the region. Although that's not exactly a controversial opinion on this site, it occurred that resistance to the notion of federal authority is not only a recurring theme in Afghanistan in general and Waziristan in particular, where a mix of tribal law, Pushtunwali, and Sharia rule, but also in the right-leaning Tea Party movement (or their kinkier name, the Teabaggers).
Both groups want to be able to wrap their hands around the neck of any federal authority more powerful than the meter maids. (Although in this country, the right recently re-embraced that concept after having put it to the side for the last 8 years in the name of liberty and freedom for some.) Both groups rally around a religious conservatism that informs every aspect of life, including the male-dominated household, eye-for-an-eye retribution, and draconian measures against consensual adult homosexuality.
Now, before anyone accuses me of making hyperbolic comparisons, let's really take it to the next level with some clarifications of how these groups differ:
First and foremost, child buggery is not an acceptable aspect of the Teabagger culture. Fair enough. (Yes, this one is ripe for commentary, but not my purpose.)
Second, I have a hunch that the rugged individualism of the Waziris carries a little more weight than our 10-cylinder-H3 driving, mall-shopping asses can imagine.
Third, I've never been in a mosque, but I'd be willing to bet there are no flags of Israel on the walls--unlike the MANY evangelical churches I've attended in the last 10 years which, without exception, display the Israeli flag somewhere in the church. (Again, ripe for comment, but not the purpose here.)
In regard to war as a solution, it's not clear to me whether the tribal leaders of Waziristan believe violence can solve everything, and it would be facile and shallow to assume that the opinions of the inhabitants of that 5000 sq mile landscape (with a population of roughly 650,000 people) are in unison on any one issue. However, if living in Houston has taught me one thing it's that the evangelical right in America have a strong and nearly unified belief that US military power can solve all the problems of the world.
Violence is most certainly the answer to some questions. Agreed. But no scenario of violence seems to bring about a sustainable solution in this case.
In some important ways, our own countrymen are more ideologically twisted than the fanatics we are told want to take our women out of schools and put burqas on them, create a global caliphate, arrange unwanted marriages for political purposes and punish adultery with stoning and otherwise turn back the clock of scientific progress to roughly 900 AD.
It's silly that these two groups should stand against each other when in fact, they both largely agree on the issues that appear to divide them. As we attempt to force-feed American-style representative democracy around them, the Teabaggers squirm to free ourselves from this out-of-control federal monster. And we are the civilized ones.
Whether we accept it or reject it, I think this black-means-white Orwellianism makes us all a little crazy one way or another.
This is not an attempt at armchair war strategy, but a theory that our persistence in spreading democracy is an easily rationalized one that becomes twisted into an excuse to levy our influence in the region. Although that's not exactly a controversial opinion on this site, it occurred that resistance to the notion of federal authority is not only a recurring theme in Afghanistan in general and Waziristan in particular, where a mix of tribal law, Pushtunwali, and Sharia rule, but also in the right-leaning Tea Party movement (or their kinkier name, the Teabaggers).
Both groups want to be able to wrap their hands around the neck of any federal authority more powerful than the meter maids. (Although in this country, the right recently re-embraced that concept after having put it to the side for the last 8 years in the name of liberty and freedom for some.) Both groups rally around a religious conservatism that informs every aspect of life, including the male-dominated household, eye-for-an-eye retribution, and draconian measures against consensual adult homosexuality.
Now, before anyone accuses me of making hyperbolic comparisons, let's really take it to the next level with some clarifications of how these groups differ:
First and foremost, child buggery is not an acceptable aspect of the Teabagger culture. Fair enough. (Yes, this one is ripe for commentary, but not my purpose.)
Second, I have a hunch that the rugged individualism of the Waziris carries a little more weight than our 10-cylinder-H3 driving, mall-shopping asses can imagine.
Third, I've never been in a mosque, but I'd be willing to bet there are no flags of Israel on the walls--unlike the MANY evangelical churches I've attended in the last 10 years which, without exception, display the Israeli flag somewhere in the church. (Again, ripe for comment, but not the purpose here.)
In regard to war as a solution, it's not clear to me whether the tribal leaders of Waziristan believe violence can solve everything, and it would be facile and shallow to assume that the opinions of the inhabitants of that 5000 sq mile landscape (with a population of roughly 650,000 people) are in unison on any one issue. However, if living in Houston has taught me one thing it's that the evangelical right in America have a strong and nearly unified belief that US military power can solve all the problems of the world.
Violence is most certainly the answer to some questions. Agreed. But no scenario of violence seems to bring about a sustainable solution in this case.
In some important ways, our own countrymen are more ideologically twisted than the fanatics we are told want to take our women out of schools and put burqas on them, create a global caliphate, arrange unwanted marriages for political purposes and punish adultery with stoning and otherwise turn back the clock of scientific progress to roughly 900 AD.
It's silly that these two groups should stand against each other when in fact, they both largely agree on the issues that appear to divide them. As we attempt to force-feed American-style representative democracy around them, the Teabaggers squirm to free ourselves from this out-of-control federal monster. And we are the civilized ones.
