Judgements

I was talking about prejudice with my good friend Jonathan this morning, and I think I should probably write some of it up. So that's what I am doing.

Firstly, I'll just give a bit of background info to the whole thing.
I'm politically active, in that I spend a lot of time engaging in debates over various things online and I have formed some fairly strong opinions on all manner of things.

In the course of my time debating online, I have spent the most time and effort at the British Independence and Democracy Forum, which is essentially a vBulletin forum dedicated to the British party UKIP along with scepticism regarding the European Union and Britain's continued membership of it.

This is all very well. People are allowed to dislike the European Union if they want, or support UKIP; it's a free country (except that it's not a free society, and I would argue that this is incompatible with the idea of a free country).

However, whilst the rampant nationalism and Euroscepticism is fairly annoying at times, what really grates across my nerves is the degree to which racism, homophobia and various other forms of prejudice are shown by these members of UKIP. It really doesn't speak well for the party, for one.

I think the problem is partially the fault of the individual and partially the fault of society, and I think that, while it may seem reasonable, it's actually a less common view than you would think.

First of all, let's say that the only people who have a right to be concerned about all these things (homosexuals, blacks, foreigners) are those who actually come into contact with the people in question; if you live on a desert island then it's hardly right to be concerned for yourself about other people, as you don't actually have any contact with them.
There is no way they could do you harm, so it's unfair to be concerned about them. There is no need to be concerned about them.

I suspect that the most uptight people when it comes to homosexuality and such are those who don't actually have any contact with the group in question, and thus have the least right to be concerned about them.

This is because coming into contact with a group naturally facilitates understanding of that group, and also prevents you from making judgements of people so quickly. You realise that there are basic differences between each person.
If we have two people chosen at random from the population of homosexuals, then person A could be a raving lunatic or even a criminal; on the other hand, person B could be almost saintly in his actions.
A is undesirable in a modern world and is a homosexual; B is desirable in the modern world and is a homosexual. The fact that they are both homosexuals has nothing to do with it; they are diametrically opposite even while sharing this common attribute.

This applies to homosexuals, blacks, Asians, Eastern Europeans; in fact, anyone you can think of.

And this is why prejudice is such a stupid concept. The idea that one can judge an individual from a group of people based merely on one's preconceived perceptions - and that's all they are, your individual perceptions - of this group is frankly rubbish.

We're all individuals. Sometimes we, society as a whole, forces some individuals to appear in a different box to the rest of us, but there's no fundamental difference.
We're all the same, precisely because we are all unique.
Just because 'we' force ourselves to see things in terms of 'us' and 'them', it does not invalidate the fact that 'we' are in every way the same as 'them'.

And this is society's flaw. The individual's is flaw is simpler and easier to overcome; society, though, cannot be changed as easily as an individual can.

Society's flaw is that it creates categories. It categorises people, and in so doing reduces those who are not in 'our' group into little more than things or animals. Remember, my group is always superior to your group.
It's snobbery on a massive level, and it's all the worse because we don't even think about it. We don't even know we're doing it, and nor do our victims.

Indeed, our victims reinforce this because, after originally being categorised by us, they then proceed to defend their status as being in that category. Which is frankly ludicrous, not to mention ultimately self-defeating.
As long as the whole idea of categories is upheld men will never be truly equal in one another's eyes. I feel sorry for gays as a minority group; even if they're not being persecuted, the fact that I think of them as a minority group (indeed, as a group at all) reinforces the fallacy that they are all the same.

We, humanity, are all ultimately the same, precisely because we're all unique, and we need to recognise this.
However, we won't achieve full equality for all unless we drop the concept of 'same', because it supports the idea of categories of people, something which denies equality.

Society needs a radical reform. We need some basis for our individual moral code, so it can't be scrapped altogether; such a move would be harmful.
However, it certainly needs changing to remove the categorisation so rife amongst people.

Homosexuals are not any different to the rest of us. They belong in the same box.
By defining them to be part of a different box labelled 'homosexuals' we are automatically segregating them and, as long as the segregation is reinforced (by both everyone who isn't a non-homosexual and those who are and persist in defining themselves by it), we shall suffer, and slowly build-up an explosive pressure for change.
This pressure will leave some day. If it leaves of its own accord, though, then the change it brings will not necessarily be pleasant.

Empty Walls

I've been listening to Serj Tankian's Empty Walls a lot recently after first being introduced to it by my friend Rob, and it's been making me think a lot about the War on Terror.
I used to be completely against it, especially the Iraq War. I held that the war was fought on dubious moral grounds, and that it was a completely over the top reaction to the 11/9 attacks.

Nowadays, I'm not so sure. I still think that the invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq were mistakes, but I can see the logic behind them, and also admit that, while the events taking place in each are morally wrong, the actual invasions themselves weren't.

The USA had just suffered the worst terrorist atrocity in history; almost 3,000 people died that day when the planes crashed into the World Trade Centre.
The economy was wrecked, the area around Ground Zero was made dangerous for breathing in due to dust and smoke and 3,000 innocent people died for the supposed crimes of the American nation as a whole.

I can't imagine just how much it affected those involved. The loss of a loved one is terrible, and then on top of it all many of the volunteers helping in the rescue and recovery operation afterwards were also killed.
Fires were still burning on Ground Zero 99 days after the attacks.

It must have seemed like the world was crashing down around the American people's ears.
The government couldn't stand by and do nothing, so it launched the War on Terror.

America suffered a great loss that day and the War was intended both to achieve revenge and also prevent it from happening again.
Perhaps not morally right, but certainly understandable under the circumstances.

I can't even remember now how Iraq started. Afghanistan was the first target of the War on Terror in 2001; Iraq was two years later, in 2003.
Wikipedia tells me it was from American intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction.

You see, I don't even remember that any more. All I can remember are the terrible events that have taken place in Iraq since the beginning of the war.
All those civilians tortured and kidnapped. Civil unrest. Thousands of people dead, and the terrible indiscriminate terrorist actions.

A while ago, on another blog, I complained that we had invaded Iraq under the justification of bringing peace and democracy and yet had become murderers ourselves.
This is still my opinion. But now I'm not so quick to condemn the troops.

It's not their fault. They've been flung into a conflict and they're just reacting to the actions of those who would happily see them dead. Under such circumstances it is difficult to maintain a strong sense of morality.

I'm not condoning the war. I'm just not so quick to condemn it any more.


Oh, and Empty Walls is a very good song. Very good for making you think.