Othering:
Dangerous Rhetoric
In light
of the attacks on Paris, dangerous rhetoric springs up in the fear of the
survivors. Once again Islamic becomes attached to terrorists, and the rhetoric
stems the fear many show. This is not a new element of fear nor does it ever
really stop. In World War I and World War II, the enemy was Germans, and all
Germans were included in the fear. During the Cold War, all communists found
themselves villainized. In the Iraq War, we found ourselves with our first
major move against Muslim groups. That is not to say any of these groups did
not find prejudice in the United States outside these times, but due to
rhetoric used in fear, the heightened violence due to prejudice causes
constitutional and moral questions.
Now,
Syrian refugees find themselves included in the Muslim fear. The fear-mongering
of some politicians is used to start a movement. That movement is used to gain
support for various foreign policy. It is easier to move people against a
common enemy then a common ally. It might even be easier to move people to go
to war then to support the ailing of a faraway people.
In the
end, the fear-mongering rhetoric used by many politicians to gain support only
end up instilling new prejudices that are largely unjustified. Those prejudices
get so extreme and fanatical that individuals are prone to hate crime and
discrimination that may not be prevented by law. The dangers go deep. Our nation’s
morality is at risk with the heavy rhetoric at hand.
Not only
morality though, the nation also suffers judgement from other countries. Worst
case scenario, the United States does exactly what the terrorists intend. If
the United States makes an enemy out of all Muslims, then the terrorists obtain
new supporters and allies. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Instead of
saying terrorists, a politician flippantly says Islamic terrorists, thus
forming the idea that all terrorists suddenly are Islamic.
Instead
of using heavy rhetoric to convince the masses of the need to take action, we should
be using a different kind of rhetoric. The kind of rhetoric which uplifts
instead. The kind of rhetoric which leads
to a greater sense of community. Action taken by a country should never be done
because of hatred. It should take action based on a sense to better the country
as a whole. An action that betters the world.
Perhaps
using the heavy hate rhetoric would be easier. However, what is easiest should not
be the policy of a whole nation. The nation should be aiming to better itself.
The prejudice-building rhetoric used around the refugees and terrorists only
put the United States back years in anti-discrimination movements. It is not
inevitable that one hated group will be replaced with a new one. History should
teach us; othering achieves nothing except more trouble.
Katie Madel
No comments:
Post a Comment