Where have all the Barbarians gone?

That will be the title of the book I'm convincing my brother to write. During a comfortable and familiar chat, where I could hear the sound of the toilet flushing and keyboard tapping in the background, my brother shared an interesting theory with me. This theory tied nicely into a theory I have, and our theori-dialoguing (I just made that word up) fueled us both with excitement to write books.

He pointed out to me that we are in an age where barbarians can no longer exist.

Barbarians (according to his definition): Those who are scapegoated; Those who are seen as savage and/or evil due to ignorance about them; Those who are labeled as "enemy" because there is a need to know just who the enemy is.

Well, "barbarians" do exist (ie. they are made to exist), but that should not be the case. In an age of communication, globalization, transportation, education and whateverelse-ication, we have access to learning about all cultures, groups of people, races, religions and what not, so as to understand each other.

However, despite the fact that we can understand each other, doesn't mean "barbarianistic-scapegoating" (another Ana term) has ceased. No, (some people in) the US label Iraqis as "barbarians" so as to know who the enemy is (but without using that exact term, of course). (Many) Israelites see Palestinians as "barbarians" (and vice versa), motorcycle gangs are seen a "barbarian" (as well as many other deviant subcultural groups) and of course criminals, who, when they are locked up, many want to forget about and throw away the key. Why does this happen? Perhaps because we need to have someone to blame, to know who are enemies are.

Here's where my theory comes in:

What if there were no such thing as enemies? What if enemies are simply those we do not a)understand, b)know or c)like (granted, c results from a and/or b), as opposed to there simply being "good" people and "bad" people in the world?

Assuming that is the case, then the "cure" for "enemization" (Zing! One more) would be to get to know those we don't know and make an effort to understand those we don't understand, which could result in liking the person/group of people.

Theory: If we knew everything about everyone in the world (their suffering, hopes, pains, guilt, struggles, faith, past experiences, etc) it would be impossible to hate, to kill, to go to war.
-If you knew that the women in the red Mazda cut you off because she was rushing to the hospital, you would probably be less inclined to shout profanities or flash the birdie
-If you knew that the store clerk was rude to you because their mother died a few days earlier, you wouldn't want to be rude back
-If you knew the names, families and goals of every soldier on the opposing side of a battle, you wouldn't be able to bring yourself to pull the trigger (Granted, there is something to be said for de-humanization, de-senstization and obedience out of fear)

Assumption: You may be thinking it is impossible to know everything about everyone in the world
You're right! However, you can pretend you know. It's a fun exercise to imagine what a stranger is like, where they are going, were they are coming from, why they may be having a good or bad day. I would encourage you to do that, if you don't already. The mere act of humanizing strangers by putting a person behind them generates compassion, understanding, empathy.

That, in a nutshell...okay, maybe a tortoise shell...is my theory. I will save the specifics for my book.

   [ posted by Anabee @ 12:07 PM ]