Molly Ivins :: Why history is relevant

[nosmokes]

original

Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate
09.16.04

Why history is relevant
Shouldn't we understand our enemies in order to combat them?

AUSTIN, Texas -- You open the paper and read the news from Iraq these days, and all you can say is, "Damn, damn, damn."

I'm flat out of ideas about how we can fix this, but I maybe see a couple of wrong roads we should give a miss. I was much struck by a column last week by David Brooks in The New York Times written in an understandable rage against the perpetrators of the school massacre at Beslan, Russia. Condemning the perpetrators of Beslan with all the vigor at his command -- hyperbole is impossible -- leads Brooks to an unfortunate conclusion.

Brooks particularly blames the American media, which he argues are "averting their eyes" and being "quick to divert their attention away from the core horror of this act" by paying attention to what he regards as irrelevant: the grievance that served as a justification or pretext for these terrorists' act of evil. In other words, he is so exercised at the utter, unmitigated evil of the terrorists, he thinks history is irrelevant.

History does not excuse terrorism, but it sure as hell is relevant, if for no other reason than you have to understand an enemy in order to combat him. Of course we should pay attention to what shaped the Chechen terrorists -- since when is learning about terrorists or trying to understand what motivates them the same as condoning them or their actions?

In the case of Chechnya, the history is so grim it draws dramatic attention to precisely how a cult of death can start. Chechnya has a long, bitter history of fighting Russia going back at least two centuries. Those of you who have been paying attention know that after World War II, Stalin deported almost the entire nation of Chechnya to Siberia and dumped most of them off in frozen fields with nothing. So most adult Chechens were born in Siberia. Because of the Chechens' desire for independence, two hideous wars followed, one under President Yeltsin and one under President Putin.
~snip~
.
.
.
more at original


---###---
Molly Ivins is the former editor of the liberal monthly The Texas Observer. She is the bestselling author of several books including Who Let the Dogs In?

(c) 2004 Creators Syndicate

[nosmokes]

1. keeping a good thought for ya, double d.

hope the cane din't beat y'all up too bad. give us a post when ya can, huh?

[Dudley_DUright]

3. Thanks for covering

Had a busy day, but not because of Ivan. We just started back with classes after cleaning up from Frances. I was just in Pensacola temporarily, but I teach at a University near Daytona. We of course are already keeping an eye on Jeanne.

[Lancer]

2. Molly is one hell of a smart

gal. Despite what her critics say, I don't think she hates shrub as much as she hates liars in general. She doesn't just talk out of her hat, either. I had not seen this piece; thank you for it.

[Dudley_DUright]

4. I love this line

Iraq: so far, no good.

Would make a great bumper-sticker.

[ixion]

5. another great op/ed from Molly

Certainly, she is one of the voices of reason in a cacophony of insanity.

Thanks, Miss Molly! :yourock:

[HuckleB]

6. Thanks, Molly.

After the beating some of us took here at DU for saying similar things, I'm happy to see someone with such a wide audience say it, too.

[GOPFighter]

7. Ivins is my favorite columnist

I just finished "Who Let the Dogs In?" and it's good for what ails ya'! It's a perfect book to read as the clock ticks down to Nov. 2. She manages to make you angry at the GOP without leaving a bad taste in your mouth for the rest of the day.

She's an amazing writer.