The little 11 month old terrorist
He was a quiet and shy baby on summer holiday at his grandparents' farmstead. Gentle and placid in nature, he was also the youngest amongst his noisy, boisterous brothers and cousins who had all come together for a great big family get together over the summer.
The children were all very young, too young to know what was right and acceptable, good and bad. Their parents were happy to leave them to play on their own devices. Before long, a pattern emerged. The older ones quickly learnt that they could do as they wished with the littlest ones. When a toy was in dispute the stronger one always won. When the older child hurt a younger child, the older child was not admonished. In this atmosphere of free for all, he, a mere babe of 11 months, found himself pushed around, kicked over and his toys snatched at will, little myriad incidents of no great signifiance when weighed individually but over the long days of summer, the frustration built up.
He was helpless to defend himself being so small and weak. One day he discovered something new. He learnt that his aggressors become frightened and back away when he bites. He learnt that this was the only way he had of defending himself.
But biting is a totally unacceptable social behavior in a child.
Does this innocent family scenario strike an insidious element of deja vu with you with what's happening in the larger world?
Comments
Excellent analogy.
Posted by: Freddie Chong | August 16, 2005 11:35 AM
The people who end up as terrorists are not taken seriously by their own community, and often by the rest of the world. They are either clamped down on, by their respective governments, or simply ignored by the international community. Very much like the baby who is told to shut up by their mother or ignored by everyone else.
But these people have needs, aspirations, hopes, and dreams as well. In that sense they are no different from any of us. Now, if you look at what they want closely, their demands do have a logical basis with sound arguments. Whether you agree with the arguments is another matter.
So, for years, they have been screaming and shouting but were ignored nevertheless. More often than not, their communities get trampled on further still. It is as if nobody cared two hoots for them (which is probably quite true).
So what do they do? They bite back. The only problem is, their bite really hurts. But it certainly serves to get attention.
Most people have to be politically correct, and say that terrorism is wrong, bad, evil, etc. But I think, deep down in the hearts of many ordinary people, they actually support them (the terrorists). Evidently, the London bombers were members of precisely such ordinary people.
What terrorists want (or what they say they want), is some respect, non-inteference from others, justice for members of their own community, the right to live their lives according to their culture, etc., and all that. Is that too unreasonable?
Detractors from this argument will of course say, "If you give the baby one lollipop, then he will demand for two!", which will probably be true. Terrorists, just like the communists and colonialist before them, will want to stuff their way of life down your throat, given the first opportunity.
But still, we can't just ignore their demands, no matter how unpalatable it may seem. Otherwise, they will just bite again and again and again.
Posted by: Freddie Chong | August 17, 2005 12:28 AM
In the larger world, the biting baby is castigated as the very impersonation of evil.
In the larger world, the biting baby could be blue-eyed blond, yellow skinned Asian, black skinned African, or olive skinned Arab.
In the larger world, without reprieve for long term grievance, the baby soon starts biting.
In the larger world, the biting baby is the face of all humanity.
Posted by: Tinkerbell | August 17, 2005 07:14 AM