A Lesser Conversation About Suicide

http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/lesser-conversation-about-suicide-19423

NATIONALISM: KANYE WEST AND AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM

'I am God's vessel. But my greatest pain in life is that I will never be able to see myself perform live.' Kanye West

I'm better than you! I can lift more weight, run faster and jump higher than all (or most) of you. I'm young, healthy and fairly intelligent. I also sound like a jerk talking like this. None of the claims I've made (whether true or not) add to my intrinsic value; yet, if I substitute my physical abilities with fame, money or political power (in many circles) I would be seen as a “better” person. In many ways Kanye West is the most logical conclusion of our materialist culture; a culture shot through with hubris and bravado. The conservative mythos of American exceptionalism is epitomized in the actions of Kanye West.

Confidence is an invisible minefield; straying too far off the path can lead to arrogance. If you ask a conservatives to explain American exceptionalism they, generally, start with the notion that God ordained this land and blessed our forefathers with the courage and vision to shape history for the rest of the world. At some point they'll tell you America is the freest, most enlightened, wealthiest and most powerful nation in the history of the world. We could debate the validity of these beliefs, but we can't deny their impact in shaping our society. Any challenge to American hegemony is equated with treason. The pride some Americans feel is based on a skewed set of metrics that always point to us being number one.

In an article about Finland Katja Pantzar wrote:

If there's one characteristic that applies to almost all Finns, it's extreme modesty. Finns don't boast about their own achievements; often they don't even mention them. You might spend an entire evening at a dinner party socialising with someone – only to find out later that they hold a world championship title for downhill skiing, invented a key component of the mobile phone or have accomplished some other "minor" achievement.

Please don't confuse my use of  this quote as another example of a liberal looking to the Scandinavian countries as a template for how we should live. There are areas where their focus on the collective have yielded better results than our dogmatic belief in rugged individualism, but It's their collective modesty that's important to this argument. Societies like Finland undoubtedly produce their share of jerks, but they couldn't have produced a Kanye West. He's as American as Apple pie. A product of our belief in American exceptionalism, even when that belief is detrimental to those affected by our behavior. His rhetoric about personal greatness, the genius in his music and his place in history rival the red meat speeches given at any CPAC or RNC lectern.

Liking (or not liking) Kanye West or his music is a separate issue from a critique of his character. Often, our ideas need physical examples to be fully understood. For many on the left the false machismo of the 2nd Amendment and Tea Party crowd serve as that example. While there might be nuggets of truth in their rhetoric it gets drowned out by their claims of moral superiority and patriotism. There's a chance Kanye West is a genius, but his actions scream jerk. America might be the greatest country in the world, but our constantly reminding the rest of the world comes off as conceit. America has progressed towards greatness because ordinary citizens have made (and continue to make) hard choices and personal sacrifices, not because we beat on our chests and remind the rest of the world of our military and economic prowess. It's hard for me to fault a person for embracing the prevailing ideology of our generation. If you see enough bumper stickers and hear enough politically driven jargon supporting the idea of American exceptionalism it isnt a far leap in logic to assume that if America is number 1, and I'm at the top of my chosen field: ispo facto I'm number 1. I'm not saying it's right, but it isn't that far of a leap to make.

What Does Charlie Hebdo Mean For Us?

The free press and the right to report, dissent or satirize without fear of criminal prosecution is often confused with the right to do so without facing the consequences of those actions. Terrorists aren't constrained by the law. I look forward to reading comments on political sites and blogs. The passion that some people write with is palpable. With that said, trolling a blog or social media sight is quite different than attaching your name and identity to an article or cartoon that terrorists find offensive. The tragedy that unfolded at Charlie Hebdo in Paris was a brutal wake up call to those who choose to stand on principle.

I'm willing to admit my intellectual limitations, but saying all Muslims aren't terrorists is akin to saying all black people aren't criminals: no serious person disputes this sort of claim. But where are we? In the face of rising fears in the western world, attacks like the one in Paris validate (for some) the distrust and hostility directed towards young Muslims. This is a negative synthesis. If stricter laws are imposed, more Muslims will feel pushed to the margins of society- which creates an atmosphere where further radicalization can occur. 

In my opinion we suffer from a lack of critical thinking and brutal honesty.

Religion, like race, is such a sensitive issue that important questions are often trivialized or outright avoided. Telling the truth isn't a Pat Robertson one size fits all jingoistic rant, nor is it a liberal utopian diatribe about getting in touch with the feelings of the perpetrators of these attacks. Any attempt to tell an "objective" truth, or set of truths, about radical Islam has to be focused on historical context. We didn't just arrive here. This doesn't mean the west should be punching bags for past offenses, but we shouldn't disconnect their influence on today.

I could be wrong, but the message I took from Charlie Hebdo was that standing on principle in the face of violent opposition can end in tragedy. I understand the willingness of some to put their lives on the line for an idea. Comedy has a way of broaching taboo topics in a way that straight dialogue can't, but the truth is: everyone wasn't laughing or willing to laugh. Now, fear has taken hold, and when we get scared in the west we cede more of our freedoms and double down on hatred. I sincerely mourn for the families affected by this tragedy. Sadly, this won't be the last clash between civilizations and ideologies.

Is There A Spiritual Path To Reason?

It's been my experience that faith rooted in cautious optimism and doubt is less likely to devolve into dogmatism. All of us believe something: especially those trapped in nihilism who profess not to believe anything. The amount of certainty one places in their worldview, coupled with an inability to accept or even process information contrary to that worldview, leads directly to a solipsistic position that makes civil discussions about religion almost impossible. The inability to consider ideas that don't originate from people who share your worldview is symptomatic of deep dogmatism.

I often hear Christians say we need a national religious awakening. This position assumes that all of our problems could be solved with a rededication to spirituality. I've been chastised for pointing out that we (as a nation) have never lived the religious fantasy many Christians are hungry for. It's more reasonable to hope or pray for a unified commitment to critical thinking and civility. If the Christian narrative of original sin is true, then believers who are calling for this Christian renaissance should know it's doomed to fail. Greed, avarice and hostility are built into our DNA.

We have religious, political and media organizations that are invested in systematically misinforming people. The university, scholarship and intellectualism have become sacrificial lambs at the shrines of religious and political ideologies. I write this as a religious person who is actively engaged in theological studies. Is there a way to balance metaphysical faith with scientific reason? I don't know if there's a yellow brick road everyone is capable of following. Any believer attempting to walk such a path should ask themselves what am I willing to give up?

If there's a spiritual path to reason it has to be built on humility. Faith and reason don't have to be part of any positive or negative synthesis. They can be independent postulates that function together. Religious faith doesn't equate to moral superiority, and a belief in scientific theory doesn't equate to intellectual superiority. It's possible to walk and chew gum at the same time, but too few are willing to risk biting their tongue.