The Moral Dichotomizing of 9/11

Linda Markowitz

I begin the first day of each semester with the same theme: overcoming moral dichotomies. I explain to students what a moral dichotomy is: good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, and then try to convey that while its definition is simple, learning to see the world outside of this framework is not. We've been bombarded with easy images of good vs. evil since even before our first Disney movie: "It's wrong for boys to play with dolls" or "It's bad to chew with your mouth open." My students fail to understand the definition of moral dichotomies until I tell them it's like having their eyes sewn closed at birth, leaving only a sliver for vision, and then being told that they can see the world more clearly now. Categorizing the world into moral dichotomies is like seeing through that sliver because we only see a portion of reality and yet we assume it is the whole thing.

As most professors are required to do, I test my students to make sure they understand the problematic nature of simplifying the world into moral dichotomies. I test them with multiple choice questions and essays. I even have them write a paper about it. But I could never have planned a test like the one they experienced September 11, 2001. The day each of them witnessed U.S. citizens die as planes seared through the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. They didn't even have to wait for the media to tell them; they knew that there was "evil" behind the attacks on our "glorious" nation.

I immediately pursued the main theme of class: overcoming moral dichotomies. When I brought up issues like "killing innocent civilians" and "hatred" and "moral righteousness" they automatically assumed I was discussing the terrorists. When I pointed out that the United States had been killing innocent civilians in Iraq since 1990 and how most people in the room were presently feeling hatred and moral righteousness, they grew confused. "How could I even compare the terrorists to the United States?" They asked. "No one would want to support a repressive society such as Afghanistan."

Overcoming moral dichotomies forces us to recognize that the "others" to whom we are feeling morally superior also feel that they are the honored ones closer to "truth." Indeed, when we look at U.S. history, how many of us can rationalize and justify the annihilation of the Native Americans and the institution of slavery? Yet our ancestors clearly felt that these systems of oppression were right, just and true. When we divide the world into "good" versus "evil" it is no surprise that any government and its citizens want to appear superior. When we give people only two moral categories from which to define themselves they will die or kill others to ensure that their positive definition remains. That is the nature of dichotomies.

Students continued to challenge me. "If we don't assign blame than how do we end the violence?" they asked. "Does that mean we should simply do nothing?" I admitted that I had no idea what to do. However, I did know that any action from the United States should be informed by the social and cultural context that gave rise to the hijackers. We must consider both British and U.S. presence in the Middle East and how we have attempted to manipulate the region so that it benefits us; from England's creation of Kuwait to the U.S.'s support of Hussein in his war against Iran and Afghanistan in its war against the Soviet Union. "We" are not innocent. Neither are "they." If we truly wish to end the violence, the United States needs to be willing to honestly reflect on its historical and contemporary foreign policies. If not, our moral posturing is no different than anyone else's.

After class a young women approached me and said that while she agreed with me partially, she had no idea how to convey moral complexity to her three-year old child. She admitted she had already told him that some "bad" people had hurt innocent "Americans" and that we had to stop them. I tried to explain that when a child hears that "bad" people have invaded the United States, their inevitable response is fear, hatred and moral superiority. Fear that the "bad" people are going to hurt them too. Hatred and moral superiority towards those who have differing opinions. The problem with fear, hatred and moral superiority is that they keep us attached to the moral dichotomy. They make it so that even fellow United States citizens cannot disagree with the moral dichotomy, unless they are willing to be defined as "bad," "unpatriotic," or "terrorist supporters."

"Can my child understand something more complex?" my student skeptically asked. Yes, even a three-year old can understand complex analysis if given the opportunity. We simply never afford them that chance. For instance, when I explained to my five-year old daughter the events of

September 11th, I told her that some people were really angry with the United States so they made some buildings collapse. Her inevitable response was analysis not blame; she asked, "Why were the people so angry?" What a provocative question, and a five-year old asked it.

My student left a little more interested than before our exchange. "But," she admitted. "I'm still very frightened for my kids." "Of course," I answered. "I'm frightened too."

What I didn't tell her, however, is that what scares me most for my children is not how to explain the war that is likely to take place between the United States and some undefined enemy. What scares me is how to explain that the hatred and moral righteousness that live inside the hearts of our enemies also live inside the hearts of our fellow citizens.

Dr. Linda Markowitz is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. Her email is lmarkow@siue.edu

Editor’s note: Professor Markowitz writes this essay with a special connection to 9/11: her brother was on the 85^th floor of the first World Trade Tower struck by the attackers. He was among the fortunate to escape without major injury. For more information on Dr. Markowitz’s published research on overcoming moral dichotomies, go to http://www.lemoyne.edu/ts/29tsabstracts2.html#markowitz.