By P. Getty
If you haven’t heard, we got him! Thanks to a couple dozen of our well-trained Navy Seals and two strategically placed bullets, Osama bin Laden has gone the way of the Dodo—yippee! I have to admit that I have been caught-up in the popular national response to the news. I can’t seem to help it. It feels right.
While feeding my obsession with every news article about the story, I came across one that struck me. Apparently, Osama bin Laden had a family and they want proof of his death. Reading this I realized something profound: Osama bin Laden was human. Does that seem weird to anyone else? Just say it (“bin Laden was a human being“). Strange, right? I think I know why. We have a case of dehumanization, but not in the most common sense.
Haslam and friends (2007) presented a powerful article outlining the ways in which we dehumanize outgroups and their members. Specifically, the authors state that we dehumanize by attributing either animal-like or machine-like characteristics to those individuals or groups. While I agree with the basic argument, I don’t think that these two types of dehumanizing accurately explain just how “we” feel about Osama bin Laden and others like him. I think we attribute more demon-like qualities to them.
If you think about it, even the families of condemned criminals can be present at their family member’s execution. They are given the right of closure. We, however, have not given bin Laden’s family the same right. The only reason why, that I can think of, is that we have forgotten that his acts, as evil and grotesque as they were, were committed by a human. As much as we would like to think that his were the acts of a family-less, evil creature, they were not. He was simply a man—a terrorist—a criminal—who messed with the wrong country. Perhaps we should set aside the demonizing and throw his family a bone.
Follow link to the CNN story about bin Laden’s Family
Haslam and Friend’s (2007)
(picture above from nndb.com)
“Osama bin Laden had a family and they want proof of his death. ”
Well P. Getty, why don’t YOU want proof of his death? What proof has been offered? Do you have anything but the ‘official’ proclalmation by the ‘government’?
Did the changing stories emanating from the White House not arouse the slightest suspicion?
Or were you even cognizant that the story did flip flop several times over?
As Marshall McLuhan noted in his work on media, it is not the big secrets that need to be hidden, as public incredulity filters such dissonance from entering their consciousness.
ww
Did you read my post? Obviously I think they should release some hard evidence, which was what I was creatively saying. I am, of course, “cognizant” of modifications and additional information added to the official story. Nevertheless, these changes hardly constitute a “flip flop.” Flip-flopping would mean that they reversed their story (i.e., the Seals did NOT hunt down and kill bin Laden). This obviously did not happen. Just because government officials polish their story doesn’t necessarily mean that there is some conspiracy going on. So I guess, to answer your question, no, I’m not suspicious about bin Laden’s death, just as I’m not concern whether Elvis, Tupac and Biggie are really dead.