Skip to main content

THE BANALITY OF DEDUCTION. VIOLENCE, TERROR, BELIEF AND WORLD ORDER

Breivik, the Norwegian mass murderer, was often laughed at as a boy when his desire to be liked made him act impulsively. The boy responsible for the Munich shooting had been ridiculed because of his foreign background. The attackers in Normandy acted upon belief in a twisted version of religion. Nice happened because society was blind to a disturbed man's increasing volatility. Kabul lost the same amount of people to the fractious society war has created.
Theories. 

These and countless of other events can be summarised and analysed in micro detail. Letters are found, diaries scrutinised, politics and social media sway the opinions of thousands, millions of people. Media and gossip create the narrative.
And yet it is not enough.
We still refuse to look at the root of evil. We spread the news as quickly as possible. We want and need to categorise events in safe bundles: Terror, Gender, Religion, Mental illness, Race, Trump, Putin, Syria, Politics, Erdogan, Arab Spring, Ukraine, Zika, Ebola, Brexit. We give names, and we tick boxes, we carry on.

The social fabric we live in is organic. It responds and reacts to millions of separate micro events. We don't notice them all and simply assume that reality 'is' as we witness it at any given moment.
We suffer from dependency, relying on second-hand information formatted for mass consumption. Judging people's behaviour and beliefs is facilitated by these elements of our understanding of the world. Not just the physical world but the rational one as well.

Black people are routinely gunned down by trigger-happy police in America. The cause? Racism. Why? White officers shoot black citizens. But why does that happen? What causes racism? Exasperation and exaggeration of politics on one side, poverty and social injustice on the other. Inequality, old-fashioned type of capitalism, lack of compassion and rooted ignorance play a big part in the breaking down of society.
Statistics prove that we have far less terrorist attacks now than we had in the 60s or 70s. That might be so, but the randomness and the chilling wickedness of recent attacks are no less unsettling. News and opinions blink at us from the palm of our hands and magnify the intensity. The stream of information bias feeds prejudice and influences judgement.
Reaching a verdict on blame solely based on that bias is the quickest way to bypass an underlying cause.

Philosopher Hannah Arendt described the systemic violence perpetrated by individuals in a mass ideology like Nazism, as the "banality of evil". Banality not in the sense of ordinary but to depict the normalisation of the unthinkable once personal responsibility is taken away by dogma.
The indoctrination of the masses facilitates and enables individuals to act without having to think about ethical behaviour. The choice to commit a crime, however, is still the responsibility of the person who, when acting on it, makes the choice not to adhere to conventions.
Decision-making is influenced by geographical, political and cultural surroundings but it is not an established trait. Conscious choice still plays a big part in shaping lives. For instance, not all Germans were Nazis; not all Italians are Mafiosi; not all Britons voted Brexit.
So when we label a killer as an 'ISIS terrorist', do we blame ISIS for his/her actions or the killer alone for acting on direct or indirect 'orders'? Do we care to understand why ISIS exists at all, what creates evil in the first place?

"Correlation does not imply causation": just because something is connected to the case, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is the prime cause. We jump to conclusions based on snippets of information available to us, relayed to us. The deduction on why things happen is drawn from categorised headlines and the subjects we link to our formulaic understanding.

Is it poverty that drives people to commit crimes? If so, everyone in underdeveloped countries or regions would be a criminal. That is not the case. It is more likely to be the inequality of the poverty in the surrounding environment and the unequal distribution of wealth. But it is not just poverty in the economic sense but the social aspect too and lack of inclusion, understanding and compassion.
People who are deprived of chances in life, who have no prospects, are more likely to turn to crime or support a violent regime.
A fear of the different, the unusual, drives divisions and exacerbates hatred and rejection, further alienating each grouping and layer in society.

The world around us evolves, moves on and morphs according to economic growth or slump, climate change, political upheavals or successes. If we don't consider the deeper implications of our actions in a broader sense, we don't stop evil from happening. What is evil to some, it is reason to others. We need to give people respect and hope, far more than money and ideology.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

REACH OUT, TALK TO PEOPLE

I wanted to share what we did at the weekend in the hope to inspire other people to try what my partner and I ended up doing. A few days ago we were walking the dogs late in the afternoon and on the way back, in this big field, we noticed an elderly woman walking slowly leaning on her stick. We asked if she was ok as she seemed tentative and a little confused. The very first thing she said, almost without realising that's what she was going to say was: "You are the first people I've spoken to all day". Neither of us expected that so we stayed with her, chatting away for about 40 minutes. We ended up walking her back to her house, exchange numbers and invite her for a Sunday roast. She was going to be 89 a few days later and it seemed a nice thing to do. She was really touched as she didn't have it in her to cook a roast for herself (and she admitted she hated cooking).

LA CLASSICISSIMA, A PREVIEW

As classics go, Milano-Sanremo is the longest of them all (almost 300km) and one of the oldest (1907). Eddy Merckx has won it a record 7 times. It has been marred by late snow at times and its route has been modified here and there, but at its core is the length and flatness, so one for the sprinters traditionally but not so much of late. There are a few lumps, but although short and not very steep, they usually come at the end of a long day on the saddle and have been decisive in the outcome of the race. In recent times, the climbs of Cipressa (added in 1982) and Poggio (added in 1960) have been the theatres of all-out attacks. The breakneck and twisty descent from the Poggio especially, induced some of the most entertaining racing... and some awful crashes too. The finish in the town of Sanremo has moved posts a few times but whether it was in the false flat of Via Roma or on the pan flat promenade by the sea, many a time it has ended in a bunch sprint.

GIRO 2019 SO FAR - THE GOOD AND THE NOT SO GOOD

The Giro, like any Grand Tour, is a race of attrition, grit, resistance, luck and sheer determination that goes on for three weeks. The mental and physical demands are huge and some riders can deliver under this pressure. Others, albeit talented, crumble under the weight of expectation. So it is that every year it becomes a lottery for the lucky and the healthy and the fit. Results, or lack of, before the race is not always a good indicator. This article is not about Nibali, Roglic or Mollema, who are expected to do a good job as leaders and they have. This is about those athletes who have impressed the most or underperformed according to their skillsets (no comment on those who have left). THE GOOD RICHARD CARAPAZ (Movistar) Although 4th last year, the Ecuadorian tends to be quiet the rest of the season, so his rise in the general classification is never a given. He climbs faster than anyone else and his initial brief might have been to be Landa's right-hand man on the