by Ethan Johnson
September 16, 2000
Extremism in the course of asserting one's belief in a cause thought to be just never casts a particularly positive light on its proponents.
I say this in response to several events in recent memory. For example, shooting doctors that perform abortions is murder, the very thing the doctors (and even file clerks) in a clinic that performs abortions stand accused of by members of several religious demoninations. Thus, the activist does no justice to his cause by committing murder in protest of a lawful procedure believed to be the killing of an unborn child.
Whatever cause Tim McVeigh might have had in mind sure got lost in the rubble of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. We remember the tragedy, and no discussion of the motive for the planting of a bomb that killed innocent children, nor its merits, are ever heard.
PETA recently had to remove billboards that gave off the impression that they were making light of New York mayor Rudy Giuliani for being diagnosed with prostate cancer, whereas the activist group was merely trying to assert that drinking milk increases one's chances of contracting the disease. While such a claim, if true, could be of serious import to society at large, the tasteless manner in which the message was conveyed left behind the bitter taste of the exploitation of a public figure's private health matters rather than a widespread acceptance of the group and its ideals.
I am amused and somewhat saddened by the pervasive myth that there is no room for "grey areas" in our rush to affix labels on our neighbors. "Are you a Liberal or a Conservative? American or a Commie? Christian or Atheist?" Such is the you're-either-one-or-the-other mentality that shapes our understanding of our society, and drives our popular media at large.
I found it interesting that when Carol Moseley-Braun was elected to the office of Recorder of Deeds in Chicago several years ago, that the local news referred to her as a "liberal Democrat". What does being "liberal" or "conservative" have to do with filing papers? Does this mean that she'll record MORE deeds, whereas her opponent, if elected, would have recorded less?
Ted Kaczynski's "manifesto" that he wrote prior to his capture for his crimes as the so-called "Unabomber" was immediately labelled "bizarre" by the American press upon its release. Upon reviewing the full text, the manifesto does not read wholly as the disjointed ramblings of a madman, instead the work is rather meticulously organized, although the content itself ranges widely from bland aphorisms not uncommonly espoused by political activists of all flavors to profoundly anti-industrial sentiments. But I suspect that he could have penned Three Blind Mice and it too would have been branded as "bizarre" by the mainstream media. Such are the rewards of sending pipe bombs in the mail to unsuspecting recipients, as well as trashing the mainstream media in one's manifesto.
I find it equally interesting what people deem to be a "legitimate" set of religious beliefs, as opposed to that which is labelled "fringe" or "cultlike". It appears to be all about two things, your sheer number of followers and the amount of money you've got in the bank. Four people in a house talking about their view of the universe on a weekly basis is a "fringe group", whereas the Promise Keepers are thrust into the limelight as "legitimate", due to their sheer numbers and buying power. Hey, you try and rent Soldier Field in Chicago for a family picnic.
Extremism does not help forward the cause of environmental awareness. Extremism does not persuade the voters to criminalize abortions. Extremism does not further the cause of otherwise peaceful religious denominations. Extremism does not convince communities to demand tougher regulations on polluters. Extremism does not persuade consumers to switch to calcium-fortified orange juice as a substitute for milk.
If the books we read are prompting us to label those who are different from us rather than to learn from another culture, then logic dictates that we ought to read different books. And if our clergy preaches love and forgiveness in one breath, and yet condemns people with differing views, ethnicity, or lifestyles in the next, we ought to examine why such people hold power over our lives instead of making our own judgements. And if we opt to kill those people whose beliefs differ from our own, rather than consider opposing viewpoints, we leave the world a poor place indeed. <EM>
