Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiAmericans rushed to unite in horror and mourning in response to the mass killings in Blacksburg in a way we haven't seen since, perhaps, the attacks of 9/11. Where I live, in Washington, D.C., residents are already sporting their Virginia Tech ribbons and sweatshirts, the way so many Americans once donned those "I [heart] New York" caps and T-shirts. While media coverage has been 24/7 and fast-paced, if not downright hysterical -- as is now the norm on all such American-gothic occasions from OJ's car chase on -- the framing and contextualizing of the massacre/suicide at Virginia Tech has been narrow indeed.
As a former diplomat, educated to see the world through others' eyes, I couldn't help thinking about how the rest of our small planet might be taking in the Blacksburg tragedy. Despite the negligible coverage of overseas opinion about this event in the mainstream media, there did appear one comprehensive overview of how foreigners reacted to the killings -- a Molly Moore piece in the Washington Post.
"Nowhere, perhaps," Moore wrote, "were foreign reactions to the Virginia shooting more impassioned than in Iraq, where many residents blame the United States for the daily killings in their schools, streets and markets. 'It is a little incident if we compare it with the disasters that have happened in Iraq,' said Ranya Riyad, 19, a college student in Baghdad. 'We are dying every day.'"
Given my own twenty-plus years in the Foreign Service, on occasions like this I find myself looking at my own country from a non-American perspective. I must confess that, when I first saw psychopathic mass murderer Cho Seung-Hui's photographs of himself savagely pointing a gun at the camera, I was reminded not only of the violent images in our popular culture, but also of George W. Bush and his wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to speak of the thrust of his whole foreign policy.
Indeed, for others on our globe, mass murder in Iraq, scenes of degradation from Abu Ghraib, CIA extraordinary rendition expeditions, and our prison at Guantanamo have already become synonymous with the U.S. government and the President; so, it would not be surprising if Cho's actions and Bush's foreign policy were linked in the minds of people outside the United States. I see several reasons why, for non-Americans, a mad student and our commander- in-chief could appear to be two sides of the same all-American coin.
First, as his own writings and evidence from his Virginia Tech classmates attest, Cho felt unloved. A thread running through his psychological profile is that he believed the world was after him. Many abroad will remember how, in the wake of the Twin Towers tragedy, the Bush administration immediately began obsessing about "why they hate us" (whoever "they" might specifically be). Despite the sympathy the President, as the representative of the American people, received from every corner of the Earth -- similar in some ways to the fruitless support efforts teachers and doctors gave Cho for his mental problems -- Bush, responding only to the hate he saw under every nook and cranny, chose to react with what many overseas considered disproportionate violence.
To begin with, there was the invasion of Afghanistan. Foreigners (and perhaps some Americans) might think of it as comparable, though on a far larger scale, to Cho's first foray into killing, his early morning murder of two people, a girl he apparently felt had slighted him and a young man who evidently happened on the scene. In each case, there was then a pause while elaborate propaganda was mustered, organized, and sent off to the public to justify the acts to come. In Cho's case, what followed was his final rampage when the deranged English major killed 30 people in cold blood; in the President's, what followed, of course, was the invasion of Iraq where the casualty figures, high as they are, are not yet fully in.
The Bush propaganda campaign of 2002-2003 to convince the American people that the Butcher of Baghdad was a WMD demon reached its apotheosis in a made-for FOX News "shock and awe" spectacular over Baghdad (which was, to say the least, not well received abroad). This brutal sound-and-light show -- meant to give Americans the sense of getting back at those who "hated" the U.S. by hitting them hard and mercilessly -- seems, when I put on my overseas eyeglasses, eerily reminiscent of Cho's videos of himself as a mean twenty-first century gunslinger, ready to shoot all those whom he dreamt did him wrong.
As someone who lived and served outside my own beloved country for so many years, a second link between Cho's actions and George W. Bush's policies appeared quite evident to me. The Blacksburg murders caused enormous grief and sadness throughout a community Cho felt had never accepted him. Distraught students have been offered counseling by the university, so shaken are some by what they experienced. The results of Bush's preemptive military strikes have been no less disruptive and unnerving, but of course on a regional, if not global stage. Tens or hundreds of thousands of innocent people have lost their lives due to his rash wars -- and his administration has shown little pity for refugees from this destruction seeking shelter as best they could elsewhere. (Iraqi refugees have essentially been all but barred from the United States.)
As Cho disrupted a small, defenseless college town in Virginia that welcomed him, Bush has dislocated a whole society that was not threatening the United States. Seen from an overseas perspective, there is, as with Cho and his "enemy," something megalomaniacal as well as delusional about the President's identification of a vast Soviet-style Islamofascist foe that the U.S. Armed Forces are supposed to face down in the Global War on Terror.
Consider as well a third disturbing analogy that may not come immediately to most American minds. Like Virginia Tech, Iraq could be considered a repository of culture and knowledge. Indeed, Saddam Hussein may have been a cruel despot, but Mesopotamia, as every American high school student should know, is widely considered by historians "the cradle of civilization," the first "university" of humankind, if you will.
George W. Bush, reflecting an attitude not unlike Cho's toward a center of learning, showed not the slightest concern or respect for the traditions of a country whose achievements have so enriched the history of humankind. Indeed, when the Baghdad National Museum was pillaged (along with the National Library and the Library of Korans) soon after the American troops took the capital, the American "liberators" simply stood by; while the Secretary of Defense, reflecting on the catastrophe, offered the now-infamous comment, "Stuff happens."
Finally, Cho's suicidal assault on a college community might bring to mind the thought that Bush's assault on Iraq has been no less suicidal -- not for himself personally but for the United States as a whole. Bush's militarism and "bring 'em on" mentality helped create an atmosphere conducive to violence that Americans inflict not only on others, but also upon themselves, leading to what might be seen abroad as a kind of perpetual national suicidal condition, examples of which appear all too frequently, including in Blacksburg, Virginia.
Bluntly put, overseas the U.S. government (and, by association, the country as well) -- thanks in large part to Bush and his foreign policy -- is now widely considered the Cho of our world, despite the often risible efforts of Karen Hughes, the administration's Image Czarina, to improve America's international standing through what she calls the diplomacy of deeds. The fact of the matter is that the President's deeds have led other countries to see our government, in its aggressive unilateralism, as unreliable, if not deranged; obsessed beyond all reason with putative enemies and globe-spanning organizations of terrorists that despise us; ready to respond with unjustified violence to any perceived slight; unwilling to listen to, or accept, advice; and unconcerned with the consequences of what it does, even when this results in widespread death and destruction in one of the birthplaces of civilization, where Bush and his top officials now pride themselves on their latest accomplishment, a military "surge" that only seems to further encourage mass murder.
Regrettably, I fear that, after more than six years of George W. Bush, Baghdad and Blacksburg are, to many on our planet, not that far apart. Woe to the diplomat who has to explain us to the world today.
John Brown, a former Foreign Service officer, served in London, Prague, Krakow, Kiev, Belgrade and Moscow. He left the Foreign Service in March 2003 to express his opposition to President Bush's war plans for Iraq. He now compiles the "Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review," available free by requesting it at johnhbrown30@ hotmail.com
Copyright 2007 John Brown
12 Comments so far
Show AllThat is a particularly twisted view."The Democrats were in power when Americans were held hostage in Iran for almost a year" -- at Reagan's behest and freed the day after the election -- a well documented deal and those holding the hostages were not "terrorists" but Iranians angry at over 20 years of a US backed brutal dictatorship. Everything you've stated is a twisted bit of propaganda put out by those who "hate America" far more that those in the countries we've oppressed. The threat to America does not come form rightfully angry people in the middle east but from the fascistic misleaders who want tto tunr this country into a dictatorship.
I feel sad that some puffy headed and fuzzy minded Americans don’t appreciate the great and risky job which President Bush has been doing for 6 yrs protecting America from the venomous attack of mad people who desire to destroy America because they are jealous and still living in dark ages.
I call on well meaning Americans to wake up and stop this democrat politically motivated personal attacks against President Bush, who is the only President who has stood up and began fierce attack against terrorists around the world.
The Democrats were in power when Americans were held hostage in Iran for almost a year.
The democrats were in power when terrorists bombed the World Trade center the first time and American embassies all over the world.
During those years, the democratic President was busy defending himself against sexual harassment accusations against him by various women.
And it was revealed he was having an oral sex affair with a female intern the age of his daughter.
And drug taking was rampant among his staff because he ended drug testing for his staff.
More than 100 people who opposed this democratic president or tried to reveal his crimes were murdered and the murders were covered up because they were labeled “suicide†and that included his personal attorney who had mountains of incriminating information about him which if he had released it world have meant instant impeachment for him.
So, if you want to point a finger, point your finger at the culprit and not an escape goat.
If Bush had not become President and began all these fights, by now, who knows, most of US cities might have been pulverized from nuclear and biochemical attacks.
I am afraid what will happen top America when President Bush leaves office and America weakens again.
Let us hope Senator John McCain will take over and continue where Bush stopped, otherwise, be prepared for the worst.
There are really very bad and lunatic people out there who hate America intensely and will commit suicide and do anything to destroy America.
As much as I am not a fan of Rudy Giuliani, but he made a very insightful statement recently (for which he is catching some flaks from the democrats.)
He said that if a democrat is elected the President, American cities may be attacked again.
If you’re an American and this is not yet a reality for you, I will suggest that you pull your head out from the sand where you’ve buried it.
If America is to survive during the next 50 yrs, America needs republican strong governments, not liberal democratic “anything-goes†one.
Secret33
Over the past week, I have been reading so many news stories about Cho Seung Hui bloody massacre of 32 innocent students at Blacksburg Virginia Tech School.
There is no way to justify this violent shooting.
My condolences go to all his victims and their families.
But while we demonize Cho, let us remember that he was a very troubled young man, and so also a victim too.
According to his family members, he was autistic, lonely, unable to communicate and relate to other people.
He got into trouble with the law for stalking or harassing some girls, eventhough they didn’t press charges.
But he suffered ridicule and was bullied by his school mates and room mates and others.
From what I have read it appeared that he never received competent psychiatric treatment and was not adequately monitored.
It is evident that the system failed him.
His violent shooting seemed to be his final and last attempt to retaliate against those who mocked, bullied and shunned him, as well as against the system which neglected him.
So, all bullies, whether they are judges, politicians, government agents, slumlords, drug dealers and assorted criminals in the society should learn a lesson from Cho about the deadly and fatal consequences of bullying others.
You can bully others all the time but one they the bullied may rise and retaliate and when he does, many heads may roll.
Again, I don’t support Cho’s way of settling the scores with his tormentors and the system, but I am sure bullies around the world must learn a valuable lesson that one day that those they bully can rise and lash out and it can be deadly fatal.
Secret33
Too many cannot forgive and therefore mistake vengeance for justice. That was the carrot and stick Bush used on 911 to win support for his global "Cowboy-Indian" movie of "smoking out the enemy." It was convenient to define the "enemy" later as a means of aggression (terrorism) and LET Bin Laden Go; probably because they share friendships and/or close ties in Saudi Arabia. If 911 was an inside job, the operators probably told Bin Laden he'd only be needed to set the sparks, that they intended NOT to go after his boys, but Saddam and the OIL prize. But it made for good theater, if you watch Fox News and mistake God's love for an angry jealous deity that enjoys combat and the death of all those caught in the middle, i.e. collateral damage. Tis a tale told by an idiot(s) full of sound and fury signifying nothing. Time and its themes circle (or recycle).
What a superb headline for this piece!
Oppressed by the power and greed of a wealthy elite, bullied and abused by bosses, and powerless to strike back war offers tham a super bowl opportunity to kick ass in a displaced aggression, voyeuristic frenzy of bloodletting self-engratiatingly exonerated by even the most feable effort to justify the current war in the false framework of a noble cause.
Too many people, including the well known chickenhawks inside the beltway, enjoy violence from their armchairs.
No matter what happens from now until Bush leaves office, his legacy will be "The Cho in the White House". Whoevers the next president will have to pick up the pieces. Talk about failed leadership!
This is a culture of death perpetuated cynically for money and power by a parasitic minority.
If Bush had been raised in a struggling immigrant family like Cho's, he might very well have ended up like Cho. To the great misfortune of the people of the US, Iraq, and the world, Bush was born into a situation that allowed him to create far greater harm.
When Bill Clinton was being castigated for his extra-marital encounters, the rightwingers were quick to ask, "What do we tell our children about the president's lies?" There was concern, and perhaps rightly so, that the person who represented American values had sullied the office.
But when the current administration, and in particular, the president, set an example of violence and revenge, where indeed is the outrage from the supposed moral establishment? If a child can be confused as to the moral rectitude of our political leaders when it comes to sex, does it not follow that a child might also become confused about violence, power, and bullying?
The message sent to the world, including American children and young people, by American leaders is that when someone slights you or even presents a possible future threat, might makes right: if you believe you are morally superior, and if you have the power to do so, strike before the enemy can find a way to defend.
I recently was told from someone who believes this nonsense that "in America, it's not politically correct to defend yourself" and that if Americans were trained to do so, the students at Virginia Tech would have fought back. (I have yet to get anyone who uses the term to actually define "politically correct.") I also read some opinions to that effect on some blogs in the past few days.
It seems to me to be the opposite. Americans are taught through the media that violence is to be admired. Diplomacy, compromise, and "passification" are denigrated as "pussification" or "lacking balls." In fact, it's rather amazing that our citizens are not even more violent, given the atmosphere of vengence along with "me first" and "America first" rhetoric so prevalent on TV news and radio talk shows.
We are inundated with approved violence from "24" and "extreme" fights on pay-per-view, to invasions of other countries, to corporal punishment for children and the death penalty. How can we expect that mayhem will not become more and more prevalent unless we, as a society, give up our fixation with squashing enemies and find common ground with the rest of humanity?
agree, Jaded Prole. There is mass corporate complicity in the Bush Reich's crimes against humanity. I would not limit that complicity to corporate media, however. Let's not leave out oil, "defense," vulture contractors like Haliburton. And don't forget those cheering throngs of "Murcans" who went along with the notion of a preemptive war against people who were no threat, WMD lies notwithstanding. It is only now when we are losing (not that we could ever "win" something that is immoral and illegal) that most Murcans want out.
Cheney and Bush are much more coniving and cynical than poor delusional Cho. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were planned long before September 2001. Cho is innocent by insanity. The neocon cabal that has stolen power and the complicit corporate press on the other hand are guilty of crimes of a historical proportion and must be held fully accountable.