On Saturday, May 26th, the following statement was posted on DKos in comment on a diary speculating that framing the Iraq conflict as a civil war helps prolong the US presence in Iraq:
the average American soldier is racist and will gladly kill Arabs
I found this remark to be extremely troubling. And almost as bad as the comment itself was the fact that it was uprated four times.
The writer of that comment was trying to make the point that American troops have been responsible for many atrocities in Iraq. No argument there. From Abu Ghraib to Haditha to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, many American soldiers and marines have committed shameful, unforgivable, and blatantly criminal acts. These deeds repulse and shame every honorable American, as well they should. Even one such incident is one too many, and, sadly, there have been far more than one. Despite this, I continue to believe that such acts are aberrations reflective of a deadly combination of administration policy and a lack of moral responsibility on the part of certain soldiers and marines. They do not reflect the character of the majority of those men and women who serve, through no fault of their own, in George W. Bush's war zones. I think this is an important distinction.
Read it again:
the average American soldier is racist and will gladly kill Arabs
It's almost breathtaking in the sheer scope of its ignorance. It makes prejudicial assumptions in a manner that would never be tolerated in reasonable company were they made against almost any other group. Consider the following variation:
the average African American is a criminal and will gladly deal drugs
Pretty offensive, right? Yet the reasoning in this clearly racist nonsense is just as consistent as in the "American soldier" remark. Crime rates do, for various socio-economic reasons, tend to be higher in black communities. And some members of those communities do turn to drug dealing as a way to make money. Nevertheless, I would be very surprised if anyone on DKos agreed with a remark like this, much less uprated it.
Maybe you think that example is too strong. Soldiers, after all, are not a race, but a profession. Fair enough. Try this version:
the average Roman Catholic priest is a pedophile and will gladly rape children
Once again, the logic is impeccable, based on the precedent of the "American soldier" statement. And once again, I think the assertion would find little support.
the average American soldier is racist and will gladly kill Arabs
When those words were first written I expected a flurry of negative responses. I was surprised and disappointed when there were none. On the contrary, some people seemed to agree with it, based on the uprating. Maybe that was a result of the circumstances under which it was written: it was nearly 2AM on the East coast, so there may have been relatively few Kossacks around. And maybe late at night, when people are tired and irritable, that kind of negativity more easily finds an approving audience. I'll be the first to admit that I've said things in the wee hours that I later regretted in the light of day.
I hope this was the case. I hope it was just a matter of words ill-chosen in the dead of night. Because those words are, in my opinion, an insult to people who face death and danger every day. They mock the memories of the 3,845 Americans who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. And they demonstrate exactly the kind of contempt for the troops of which conservatives so gleefully and regularly accuse us.
It's easy to let outrage at the deeds of some members of a certain group color our opinion of that group as a whole. That's the root of prejudice. Many of us -- including myself -- have strong feelings both about George Bush's illegal war in Iraq, and the despicable acts committed by some American troops in that war. But we can't let those feelings turn into hatred for the vast majority of men and women who serve with honor. Oppose the war. Oppose the crimes committed in that war. But support the troops. Bring them home.