brooks111109

On the homepage

Petters

Petters' jurors go home for the weekend

Out There

Burning

Anoka County burn clears way for life

Cameron Coffee

David Brooks: The jihadist in our ranks

After the Fort Hood carnage, media engaged in a politically correct rush to nonjudgment.

Last update: November 10, 2009 - 6:45 PM

Print this story

Follow Opinion Exchange on Twitter

We're all born late. We're born into history that is well under way. We're born into cultures, nations and languages that we didn't choose. On top of that, we're born with certain brain chemicals and genetic predispositions that we can't control. But unlike the other animals, people do have a drive to seek coherence and meaning. We have a need to tell ourselves stories that explain it all. We use these stories to supply the metaphysics, without which life seems pointless and empty.

Individual responsibility is contained in the act of selecting and constantly revising the master narrative we tell about ourselves.

Most people select stories that lead toward cooperation and goodness. But over the past few decades a malevolent narrative has emerged.

That narrative has emerged on the fringes of the Muslim world. It is a narrative that sees human history as a war between Islam on the one side and Christianity and Judaism on the other. This narrative causes its adherents to shrink their circle of concern. They don't see others as fully human. They come to believe others can be blamelessly murdered and that, in fact, it is admirable to do so.

They are the ones who go into crowded rooms, shout "Allah-u-Akbar," or "God is great," and then start murdering.

When Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan did that in Fort Hood last week, many Americans had an understandable and in some ways admirable reaction. They didn't want the horror to become a pretext for anti-Muslim bigotry.

So immediately the coverage took on a certain cast. The possibility of Islamic extremism was immediately played down. This was an isolated personal breakdown, not an ideological assault, many people emphasized.

Hasan was portrayed as a disturbed individual who was under a lot of stress. We learned about pretraumatic stress syndrome, and secondary stress disorder, which one gets from hearing about other people's stress. We heard the theory (unlikely in retrospect) that Hasan was so traumatized by the thought of going into a combat zone that he decided to take a gun and create one of his own.

A shroud of political correctness settled over the conversation. Hasan was portrayed as a victim of society, a poor soul who was pushed over the edge by prejudice and unhappiness. There was a national rush to therapy. Hasan was a loner, who had trouble finding a wife and socializing with his neighbors.

This response was understandable. It's important to tamp down vengeful hatreds in moments of passion. But it was also patronizing. Public commentators assumed the air of kindergarten teachers who had to protect their children from thinking certain impermissible and intolerant thoughts. If public commentary wasn't carefully policed, the assumption seemed to be, then the great mass of unwashed yahoos in Middle America would go off on a racist rampage.

Worse, it absolved Hasan -- before the real evidence was in -- of his responsibility. And evidence is now mounting to suggest he chose the extremist War on Islam narrative that so often leads to murderous results.

The conversation in the first few days after the massacre was well-intentioned, but it suggested a willful flight from reality. It ignored the fact that the war narrative of the struggle against Islam is the central feature of American foreign policy. It ignored the fact that this narrative can be embraced by a self-radicalizing individual in the U.S. as much as by groups in Tehran, Gaza or Kandahar.

It wasn't the reaction of a morally or politically serious nation.

David Brooks' column is distributed by the New York Times News Service.

Recent Commentary stories

Army ignored signals that Hasan may be dangerous - November 10, 2009

Army ignored signals that Hasan may be dangerous - As we learn more about Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the accused Fort Hood killer, what we discover is deeply disturbing -- but not as disturbing as evidence piling up that military authorities knew for months, if not years, that he had displayed radical Islamic tendencies and did nothing about it. More

Naveed Ali Shah: Tragedy hits home (from a world away) - November 10, 2009

Naveed Ali Shah: Tragedy hits home (from a world away) - More

Comment on this story | Read all 33 comments | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS