When the Occupier Blames the Victim
Published in Al-Mustaqbal
(Lebanon) on 13 March 2006
by Abd al-Latif al-Ouamla (link to original)
(Lebanon) on 13 March 2006
by Abd al-Latif al-Ouamla (link to original)
Translated from
by Aja Ishmael.
Edited by .
The revealed religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) and all benevolent human beliefs call for justice, tolerance, and fraternity. Accepting injustice, whether by words, actions, or even within the heart, goes against human nature. Resisting aggression is consistent with human nature and is in harmony with laws and religions, because by his nature man understands the meaning of honor, pride, and freedom, and the history of the world testifies that war and violence do not secure peace.
Indeed, it is pure human nature for a man to resist an attack on his land, his honor, and his humanity. This is the way the world has worked since God made humans of different religions and races, not to mention different levels of culture and development, from age to age and from one land to another.
And contrary to what some of the global media propagate, the peoples of the world know that wars of tyrannical, unjust, and aggressive occupation are not at heart at religious issue, nor an issue of nationalism, nor even one of patriotism or race. Instead, it is a human tendency, simple in motive and complicated in means.
In the current case, has the time come to revise and re-analyze history to come to the conclusion that the struggle of the French resistance to free their country of Nazi German occupation was religiously and ideologically motivated, and nothing more? And if that's not the case, then why were Frenchmen resisting this aggression against their human dignity! Or was it that there were undiscovered French religious extremists among them!
And what about the Vietnamese, and the way they fought occupation for ten years and sacrificed everything precious, all without being fundamentalist zealots? And what about the Freedom Movement in the jungles of the Amazon? And Africa - south and central? And others? Did the American Indians in North America hundreds of years ago need to invite extremists into their midst, for them to recognize the simplicity of carrying weapons and defending themselves? And did the Japanese suicide pilots in World War II have religious books and propaganda in their possession before carrying out their missions?
Indeed, the technique of blaming the victim for what happens to him is an old one, used by the colonial powers and carried out and nurtured constantly in occupied countries. The victim must be blamed and must be perpetually persuaded that he is responsible for whatever harm comes to him, for that is what is required for his continued humiliation and degradation; For the aggressor and the tyrant are always on the verge of ending their aggression, but the victim's "mistaken" attempts at defending himself only cause him further pain! The victim must not resist, and if he does, then that is ideological and religious extremism or a desire to eliminate the freedom of the aggressive occupier and destroy democracy because he hates it!
This is the brainwashing that the entire world must fight against, because it deprives man of his humanity before, even before going into the details of religion, race, and patriotism.
Indeed, it is pure human nature for a man to resist an attack on his land, his honor, and his humanity. This is the way the world has worked since God made humans of different religions and races, not to mention different levels of culture and development, from age to age and from one land to another.
And contrary to what some of the global media propagate, the peoples of the world know that wars of tyrannical, unjust, and aggressive occupation are not at heart at religious issue, nor an issue of nationalism, nor even one of patriotism or race. Instead, it is a human tendency, simple in motive and complicated in means.
In the current case, has the time come to revise and re-analyze history to come to the conclusion that the struggle of the French resistance to free their country of Nazi German occupation was religiously and ideologically motivated, and nothing more? And if that's not the case, then why were Frenchmen resisting this aggression against their human dignity! Or was it that there were undiscovered French religious extremists among them!
And what about the Vietnamese, and the way they fought occupation for ten years and sacrificed everything precious, all without being fundamentalist zealots? And what about the Freedom Movement in the jungles of the Amazon? And Africa - south and central? And others? Did the American Indians in North America hundreds of years ago need to invite extremists into their midst, for them to recognize the simplicity of carrying weapons and defending themselves? And did the Japanese suicide pilots in World War II have religious books and propaganda in their possession before carrying out their missions?
Indeed, the technique of blaming the victim for what happens to him is an old one, used by the colonial powers and carried out and nurtured constantly in occupied countries. The victim must be blamed and must be perpetually persuaded that he is responsible for whatever harm comes to him, for that is what is required for his continued humiliation and degradation; For the aggressor and the tyrant are always on the verge of ending their aggression, but the victim's "mistaken" attempts at defending himself only cause him further pain! The victim must not resist, and if he does, then that is ideological and religious extremism or a desire to eliminate the freedom of the aggressive occupier and destroy democracy because he hates it!
This is the brainwashing that the entire world must fight against, because it deprives man of his humanity before, even before going into the details of religion, race, and patriotism.