After sending my extending family a recent Kevin Drum post about torture and civilization, I received several replies from conservative members of my family intent on rationalizing the use of torture. First, the ticking time bomb. Second, impossible to define torture. Third, a full-on leap into moral relativism. Naturally, I pushed back.
Well, for my aunt, that was the last straw. (On second thought, I’m not sure she actually understood anything I was saying.) She wrote back a pretty nasty little letter in which she informed me that my opposition to torture is naive because I “live in the world of academia and theory.” Seriously? Since when?
I have written (but not sent) a response to her, although I did publish it openly here, for the benefit of all. I decided not to send it to her because I thought it was time to drop the conversation. To escalate it further would have opened up a world of drama, and to be honest, not worth it. So the email I actually sent just thanked her for her thoughts and time so as to move on. But it feels good to publish my thoughts here… who knows, maybe someday she’ll stumble on this… not likely.
Without further ado, here is my aunt’s letter to me (itals) with my unsent responses underneath (bold). Both are unedited for the full experience and, I think, provide a unique window into how Americans are wrestling with the idea of torture.
(Warning: This does get a little personal, and I do try to stick up for myself here without sounding too righteous. OK, maybe just a little; after all, I am arguing against torture.)
__________
Hi Aunt XXXX,
Thanks again for your thoughts. This is good stuff — what a great discussion! See my responses below…
Love,
Jesse
I’m replying to you only because your Grandfather doesn’t want to deal with this anymore, and no one else has responded publicly. If you are going to respond, please do so to just me.
I’m not sure I understand the reason for keeping this conversation just between us — like you say, we’re each pretty rooted in our beliefs. But I have gotten words of support and wisdom from everyone, including most recently my grandparents in Nebraska. I think this topic is sometimes difficult for people to discuss publicly (I have friends who don’t feel comfortable or knowledgeable enough to offer an opinion) but people still appreciate following the conversation. But that’s OK, I realize Grampa wants to move on.
The idea that we, as American’s, should take our moral standards and push them onto other societies is frightening.
For years Republicans have justified the invasion of Iraq because America was bringing liberty to oppressed Iraqis. I’m not arguing that America should push our moral standards on foreign cultures. I don’t support colonial hegemony. I’m not arguing to invade a nation in order to ‘liberate’ it. I’m just arguing that there can be (and is) a universal definition of torture, and we should adhere to our laws and international obligations which define torture. The Bush lawyers ignored these obligations when they tried to rewrite the definition of torture — that’s why they’re under investigation.
Which morals do we put on them? Yours or mine?
Neither of ours, Aunt XXXX. That’s the point. The story of human history is one of striving to advance civilization. It’s only been within the last few hundred years that the world has been able to agree that there are certain moral absolutes that should be applied universally to all people. These aren’t American morals, or even the Western morals… consensus comes from years of working across national and cultural borders. One example is the United Nations Convention Against Torture. Our legal system must be better than the basest of human instinct and temptation.
Many Republicans continue to argue that abortion should be illegal because it’s immoral, that gay marriage should be illegal because it is immoral, that marijuana should be illegal because it’s immoral, that there can be no assisted suicide because it’s immoral… But when it comes to torture, all of a sudden there’s gray area? Sometimes it’s moral to torture? I don’t understand. How is it more important to stand firm on gay marriage than torture?
Why is it “politically incorrect” to have a belief system that might not fit perfectly into a progressive agenda? This is how you develop your own beliefs! Who determines these “politically correct” beliefs?
The reason it can sometimes be awkward for me, as a progressive, to discuss moral absolutes (like why I oppose torture, or honor killings, or forced female circumcision, or the death penalty) is because I believe in embracing diversity and tolerance. It has nothing to do with any ‘agenda.’ Some have mistaken this embrace of tolerance for diverse cultures to mean that we must accept every value system as equally valid; some go so far as to say that it is inappropriate, even politically incorrect, to for us to judge another culture’s moral standards. I do not believe this. I believe there are moral absolutes—A society that condones honor killings, slavery, rape, torture, etc (rejecting international consensus) is less civilized than a society that denounces these actions. And I am free to judge because I believe there are moral absolutes.
In a perfect world, where everyone’s goal is similar, your beliefs might work. Many have tried.
My belief that violence begets violence is hardly controversial. My belief in the efficacy of peaceful conflict resolution is based on the most successful political and social movements in history: Gandhi’s march for democracy, or the fight to end slavery and protect civil rights, the woman’s suffrage movement, etc. And broadly speaking, humanity shares the same goals, much as we share the same morals — indeed, America is founded on the very principle that free people can live peacefully and achieve happiness together.
You live in the world of academia and theory. It’s not wrong, but it is only one viewpoint…
The idea that I live in some sort of ivory tower of theoretical academia, divorced from real reality, is disingenuous. Take a step back — I’m 26 years old, and I’ve spent years living and working with the world’s poorest people in destitute villages all over the world: India, Asia, Eastern Europe, Australia, Central America, with new projects in West Africa and Brazil. I’ve dedicated my life to fighting for social justice within the truly harsh realities of the most marginalized and desperate people. To imply that I don’t understand how the world really works, as if I live in liberal la-la land, is absurd.
My beliefs are rooted in myriad on-the-ground experiences and in listening to anyone who will speak with me — In my short life I’ve interviewed and met with indigenous leaders from around the world, Nobel scientists, corporate CEOs, authors, CIA officers, congressmen, war crimes prosecutors, torture survivors, Gitmo guards, Iraqi and Iranian refugees, Hasidic settlers, human rights activists, international aid workers, and US Generals… and I’ve come to believe that there are certain elements of morality that are basic to humanity across time, place, and culture. There are moral absolutes. This is not some sort of academic trickery.
…as you should be able to see from both your Grandpa’s response and mine. The fact that not everyone in your family agrees with you should tell you that maybe things aren’t as obvious as you believe, and that maybe there is a great deal of that gray.
People disagree, true, but I’m not sure there’s as much disagreement as it seems. I mean, to ask you directly: Do you believe there are no moral absolutes? Do you believe that all value systems are equally valid?
I could take each one of your comments and provide an argument back, but ultimately it will be my time spent reaffirming what I believe and your time spent trying to figure out how to convince me otherwise.
My life and career is dedicated to social justice, so I’m obviously more than happy to continue this conversation in more detail. This is also why I think it’s good to include more people in these discussions.
You threw out a question, but it appears that you already were firm in your beliefs.
To clarify, I didn’t throw out a question. I put forth a statement of firm belief (civilized societies don’t condone torture), to which people reacted.
Enjoy life. Humanity will survive!
I do, I do. And of course, humanity will survive! In fact, it will be stronger for having gone through these moral tests, and for having had these conversations.
