Terror and rape as acts of control is common in the Congo, especially in the mining towns where the rebels have much to gain from controlling the mines that supply much of the world’s coltan and cassiterite (necessities in our ubiquitous modern electronics like cell phones and laptops). The locals, far from benefiting from supplying such minerals to the world, call the minerals a curse for bringing such terrorism to their homes. And these rebel groups stay in power as they continue to receive funds from all of us willing to pay them to just continue our supply of cheap cell phones no matter the cost to others. A cost that apparently includes the gang rape of one month of babies.

It is so disgusting and twisted that it is hard to put into words the rage it elicits. While America is in a dither about being offended by the presence of Muslims in our midst, this is what is happening in the world right now. We talk about fearing terrorism, but this is terrorism in the flesh. At some point we have to move beyond talk. We have to stop watching films like Hotel Rwanda just so we can seem caring and enlightened at our church “God at the Movies” night, and start working to ensure it doesn’t happen again. Hatred, power, and money are all still fueling atrocities – we have to get over our poor track record of only caring about such things in hindsight. Feeling bad about the Holocaust, or Rwanda, or Bosnia, or Japanese internment camps is trendy years later. What takes guts is standing up and doing something about such things as they happen. That is never popular, and will get you called some nasty names as you encourage society to change and care. But what does it say about the state of our souls if we don’t at least try?

To that end, I see three areas where we can start to take steps forward to deal with the larger issues at play here. And, yes, these are beyond the immediate care that is needed for these women and children and the instability of the moment. These try to get at the heart of the issues in society and culture, which is why they are hard and unpopular.

1. We need to campaign for conflict-free cell phones (and other electronics). Companies that purchase minerals from these areas need to be held accountable at all levels of the process. Buying from middlemen who buy from the terrorists does not absolve a company of guilt. Putting out a product as cheaply as possible should never be an excuse for supporting terrorist groups that maintain control through mass gang rape. I want the companies I support to be transparent in who they deal with. The world needs to know what their money is actually funding when they buy a cell phone. While it is probably too much to ask that companies educate and inform us of what we are actually buying, they can at least work on abiding by US trade law and not import goods obtained through such acts of terror. Consumers can also demand conflict free items, letting the companies know that we are willing to pay what it costs to guarantee that we are not funding such rebel groups when we purchase a product. The consumer sets the demand, and it is up to us to demand a product that doesn’t support gang rape. But first we have to start caring more about the people being terrorized than we do about our latest model phone.
2. We need to start treating peacekeepers with the same respect we do the military. Peace is a dirty word in our country, while our troops are sent care packages, given discounts, and revered as heroes. But soldiers trained to otherize everyone have a hard time waging peace. Train a soldier to eliminate empathy for the other so that they can kill enemies and it is hard to then expect them to switch into roles of protector, healer, and peacekeeper. We need more people strictly devoted to caring for and protecting others. 25 UN Peacekeepers to protect thousands from guerrilla fighters isn’t enough. Instead of just sending out troops to destroy (in the name of protection), we need armies of people devoted to caring for others. And for that to be a reality, that job needs to be just as attractive and honored as those trained to eliminate others. Peacekeepers need the free ride to college, they need that half price movie ticket, they need parades in their honor, and days set aside to honor the work they do. To give the world the help it desperately needs, we need to raise up armies of peacekeepers willing to empathize, care, and protect so that the evil powers of this world will terrorize no more. But first we have to stop demonizing the very idea of being a peacekeeper.
3. Finally, we need to emphasize the full equality of women. Men who are raised to see women as inferior (in whatever way) are more apt to objectify us. When women are inferior objects for a man to use – as a subservient housewife, as a porn image, as a prostitute, or as a rape victim – we become less than human. Men seek to control us physically, sexually, emotionally, and mentally. Controlling something that is inferior or weaker for one’s own pleasure (be that sexual pleasure or the pleasure of power and money) is at the root of much injustice in this world. So often women bear the worst of any injustice because men were taught to see us simply as objects to be used in the power plays of life. All too often those that seek justice brush aside concerns regarding women’s equality as merely a distraction – something to be dealt with once the real justice issues are resolved. But as we see here, how women are viewed and treated is at the heart of the matter. Women are being gang raped as an act of control – their bodies are currency in the international games of commerce and trade. They should never be an afterthought. Caring for their wellbeing – of not just their broken bodies, but of their souls is as important as resolving the conflict over minerals. They should not be brushed aside as unfortunate victims of a larger issue; they deserve to be treated as equals worthy of intervention and advocacy. Men should not permit women to continue to suffer simply because our equality is considered too political, or liberal, or insignificant to bother with. Changing the way the cultures of the world (including our own) view women is at the core of ending these injustices. But first we must care about women enough to be their advocates even when it is unpopular.

This list is a start. It isn’t the solution – there are too many factors at play here for that. These are simply three action steps that we can start with. It is easy to be paralyzed with rage at these atrocities and feel like there is nothing we can do. But we can start pushing for change – even if that means starting with ourselves and how we view consumption, or the role of peacekeepers, or the equality of women. Choosing to care and make a difference while there is still time is difficult. Maybe it would be different if it was our family – our mothers or sisters or babies – who were being raped. We would turn the world upside down for their sakes. Is it too much to ask that we start with a few small changes for the sake of these mothers and sisters and babies?

My first thought in the “what a tangled web we weave” category, was to wonder if the Allied airmen dropping those bombs some years ago ever thought that their action had the potential to kill their unborn grandchildren. Or that one day we would live in a globalized world where the idea of Germany and America being at war with one another would be utterly preposterous. And still the violence and the hatred of a time gone by had its latest causalities in 2010.

I’m fully aware that if any war could ever be called a “just war” it would be World War 2. I also know that this could simply be seen as a freak accident. But it isn’t just in Germany where the conflicts of the past still reach into the peaceful times of the present – harming generally those with no stake in the fight. The poor farmer in Laos whose legs were blown off when he overturned a bomb leftover from when his country was used as a pawn as the colonial powers of the West fought for control in Vietnam. The three children killed in Columbia when they triggered a landmine while playing a game of soccer. The people in Japan dying from cancers caused by the atomic bombs dropped in their country. The children born with birth defects because their parents were exposed to Agent Orange in the Vietnam War. Wars never end when a treaty is signed or peace declared.

It can be easy to dismiss these as simply the vicissitudes of life, but I wonder if that is just a way to avoid dealing with the issues. Our news channels don’t give us body counts of those we’ve killed in Iraq or Afghanistan because that would make the conflict too real – too human. Thinking about the lingering effects an act of violence might have seems to do the same. In the moment the goal of winning trumps any understanding of the enemy as a real person. Considering that in a decade one might be sitting down for a cup of coffee with the person one is attempting to kill today isn’t conducive to gaining the upper hand today. But the future still comes.

I recall first understanding the strangeness and regret hindsight can elicit when in grad school I sat down for a lunch with a friend from the Ukraine and we joked about the duck and cover drills we practiced in our grade schools. Each of us was conditioned to hate the other, sure that our respective countries would launch an attack at any moment. And now we were in school together, studying missions theology, eating sandwiches at the local deli. It is easy to question why I assumed she was my enemy then, I just wish I had had the courage to do so when I was a child.

I know how simplistic it sounds to suggest that a long-term perspective be applied to the conflicts of the present. Most would answer that the peace of tomorrow can only come through the violence of today. But how many of us would look at our closest friends and tell them that if we could travel back in time we would have no problem killing their grandparents. So why are we interested in killing people today whose children will go to school with our kids in a few years? Are we okay with the bomb we dropped today killing our allies in Afghanistan in 70 years? I hope if anything good comes from this incident in Germany it is that some of these questions start being asked. It’s complicated and messy, but that’s what generally happens when we take the time to think beyond the moment.

Well the other day I happened to catch an episode on Laos. Now I doubt the typical American traveler is planning a vacation to Laos anytime soon. Most of us know nothing about Laos (as the episode bluntly pointed out). But the purpose of this particular episode was not to sell US viewers on exotic destinations, but to instead say "see how stupid and uninformed we Americans are of the ways we have screwed up the world."

I know about as much as the average American about Laos – that is next to nothing. I even majored in history and took an Asian history class (for which the prof decided to skip all of South East Asian history because it was just too complicated … but perhaps because it was just too controversial for a school like Wheaton). So like any "good" American I knew little about our illegal acts of war in Laos during the Vietnam war. Or how the country still is plagued by millions of unexploded bombs scattering the countryside – waiting to be uncovered by farmers, builders, or children.

In the episode Anthony Bourdain follows a team that is uncovering these death traps lurking in the fields of Laos. And he sits down to a simple meal with a family where the young father had his arm and leg blown off when he accidentally uncovered a bomb. Families paying high prices for their country being a pawn in the game of nations before they were born.

What struck me as I watched the episode was the unapologetic attempt to show Americans our dirty laundry that doesn't make it into textbooks or AP exams. It's hard to ignore current conflicts, although the media does a great job of hiding the brutal reality of Iraq. And it is easy to justify violent engagement in WW2 (as Godwin's Law repeatedly demonstrates…). This is even a country where some people still think it's wrong (even sinful) to question US involvement in Vietnam ("but of course colonialism is a good thing…"). But the less than pretty and often completely illegal military missions our country has engaged in are generally unknown to the average American.

I was well into college before I even learned about US military manipulations of dictatorships and coups in Central America. But I didn't learn such things in my classes. A very social justice oriented friend who also happened to be  Hispanic did her best to educate people on how the US has controlled and harmed other countries. Of course the response from other students generally was to deny her stories and to call her biased and unreliable. Few ever took the time to ferret out the truth – choosing to place blind faith in the absolute goodness of the USA instead.

War is often seen as only a glorious endeavor and these covert operations to protect our own interests are swept aside and hidden away. Maybe it's too hard to chant "USA! USA! We're #1" when the battle isn't spun as "protecting our freedom" but is in reality the rape and slaughter of peasants because they occupied land full of mahogany forests we coveted (Haiti 1915). So we just stay confused and accuse the rest of the world of being jealous of our freedom when they speak words against us. Maybe if we would just get over ourselves we would realize that the Lao man whose limbs were blown off just wants to provide for his family again. They aren't jealous of us, perhaps they just want to reclaim all that we have stolen from them.

I actually bloged about my encounters with vampire (books) three years ago (here), so it's not a new subject on this blog. But after reading through Stephenie Meyer's Twilight series recently, vampires have once again been on my mind. If you haven't heard of the series that means you are most likely not a teenage girl (or a huge fantasy geek). I was intrigued by any book that merited a midnight release for it's fourth installment and had been following the debates as to if the books were sexist or not (I personally think not). So I decided to give the books a go and ended up throughly engaged.

As you probably gathered at this point the books are about vampires (sorry for the spoiler). But the main characters in the books are "good" vampires – they feed off animal blood, not humans. What I found most intriguing though was the process by which these characters became vampires. Each of them had been at the brink of death and were at that point transformed into vampires – immortal, perfect creatures (at least in this series). Given the author's expressed religious devotion, I can't help but see the spiritual parallels there. The chosen ones being essentially resurrected into strong, beautiful, gifted, eternal (yet physical) beings. Interesting concept.

But the obvious spiritual connection in the books reminded me of other conversations I have had relating Christianity and vampires. The whole concept of blood being shed to give another eternal life mirrors vampire lore. There are of course those that recognize that with derision as this quote demonstrates -

"Almost two billion people on the face of this planet are Christians," he said. "That means every Sunday you'll find hordes of these creatures lining up to drink the blood of their god in a ritual called communion.

"And what does their god and his church offer them in return? "Everlasting life …

"If that is not the promise of a vampire religion, then I don't know what is …"

Sinton said Christianity was the only religion that worshiped a corpse and one of a handful that still engaged in blood rituals.

"Visit one of their churches and you'll often find a huge statue of their vampire Christ looming over the congregation," he said. Instead of blood dripping from fangs, Christ's blood drips from his hands, feet, side and crown.

"1.9 billion people believe this immortal god is their salvation and that his blood can redeem and protect them. "Listen to some of the hymns they sing," he said, "as they sway hypnotically before this eerie preternatural creature …"

Are You Washed In The Blood?
Jesus Thy Blood and Righteousness
Nothing But The Blood
Saved By The Blood
The Blood-Washed Throng
The Bloodwashed Pilgrim
There Is A Fountain Filled With Blood
There Is Power In The Blood

"With all this blood imagery," Sinton said, "no wonder the congregations descends like vampires when the priest calls them up for communion …" The Christian Bible states that Jesus actually said "Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:54).

By drinking the blood of Jesus and eating his flesh, Christians believe they die and are reborn as immortals.

But others see those same elements and embrace the similarities. I've heard of goth oriented churches that play up the vampire connection especially related to communion. I guess it's just another form of cultural contextualization. Some churches reach yuppies by presenting Christ as the ultimate CEO, other churches reach the goths by comparing Christ to vampires. (I think I'd rather attend the vampire church…)

The connection of shed blood and immortality is an ancient one – one of the oldest religious beliefs around. Some dismiss Christianity for dwelling on it. Others (like C.S. Lewis) believe that in Christ myth became fact – making it all resonate with our deepest cultural longings. As he wrote in God in the Dock -

The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens — at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying nobody knows when or where, to a historical Person crucified (it is all in order) under Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle.

In Christ in a way we have the fulfillment of legend. An interesting concept if nothing else.

But I'm sure that's not the reaction most have to the books. Obsessing over Edward Cullen seems more the norm…

I know I'm being glib about this, but the whole thing is just so weird. It made me recall a summer camp I attended in high school themed on the end times (yes I grew up in that sort of church). The whole week was one long ongoing skit and at the end of the week those of us who had been "good Christians" were raptured. We were taken on an all night fun party in San Antonio. Those "left behind" had to endure the Tribulation. Basically they were forced to stay up all night and do things like watch Thief in the Night repeatedly and play phonetic hangman. And yes, hearing "Wish we'd all been ready" is torture.

I don't condone torture. And it just seems so strange to me to use music as a means of inflicting pain. How do you respond to this?

The quote of the day. After the war-protesters were arrested at Holy Name Cathedral this morning, Cardinal Francis George responded "We should all work for peace," George said, "but not by interrupting the worship of God."

Because this is America. Peace has nothing to do with worship, or Easter, or Jesus…

Edited to clarify my thoughts -

I honestly have really mixed reactions to the whole thing.  I don't think the protest was the best approach to getting the message out there.  As the paper mentioned this morning, doing something like that in Chicago in the wake of the NIU shootings is a bit too much.  Luckily this was a Catholic church and not an evangelical megachurch or the protesters could have been shot on site.

But I understand the need to do something for peace and that yes shocking people out of complacency is needed.  They might have had a somewhat sympathetic audience at the cathedral, but how many people there are actively working to bring an end to violence?  If their words don't translate into action what are they worth? (and yes I am speaking to myself here as well).  Perhaps the homily would have encouraged some to action, perhaps not.  This is an issue that goes much deeper than politics and should not be ignored by the church because it can be labeled "political."  If we care about peace, if we care about the Iraqis who deal with real horror everyday, we wont shut such things out of our worship services.  We wont be more pissed off that our "Easter finery" got fake blood on it and that we had to think about uncomfortable things than the fact that those horrific things are happening to real people.

This was an Easter service.  A celebration that God has overcome death – that enemy has been destroyed.  It comes just a week after we remember when Jesus challenged political powers in a triumphal entry into Jerusalem and then marched into the Temple to speak out (in physical action) against the injustices being perpetrated there against foreigners and the poor.  Was what he just did a silly stunt to gain a bit of media attention?  Shouldn't he just have let the people worship the way they expected to worship over the Passover holiday?

Honestly I'm conflicted.  I don't know if the protest was useful, but I think something is needed.  What would have been better and effective?  How can the message of Jesus and the hope of Easter be translated into action and not just warm fuzzies?  How can we get over just our comfort and care about the needs of others (in Iraq and elsewhere)?  There are deeper questions here than just the "disturbance of peace" and I think they need to be addressed instead of just brushed aside because something challenges our assumptions regarding what is appropriate behavior for church.

As soon as I read about these findings, I was reminded of the conversation of an Afgani woman I overhead where she discussed the American military's behavior in Afghanistan (read my blog post about it here). Another incident of cruel and senseless violence inflicted on a child.

And they really wonder why this is an issue?

When you take a group of people, mostly men, and teach them through intense indoctrination to objectify the Other of course stuff like this will happen. It takes seeing the Iraqis or Afganis as "the enemy" and not as real people in order to be able to kill them. If the soldiers didn't objectify others and instead saw that they were mothers, fathers, lovers, teachers, grandparents, and someone's child their ability to kill them would be compromised. They must be taught not to care, not to see the human face, and not to see life from the perspective of that other person. Alfie Kohn actually addresses this issue in his book Unconditional Parenting -

People who can – and do – think about how others experience the world are more likely to reach out and help those people – or, at a minimum, are less likely to harm them. Kafka once described war as a "monstrous failure of imagination". In order to kill, one must cease to see individual human beings and instead reduce them to abstractions such as "the enemy". One must fail to realize that each person underneath our bombs is the center of his universe just as you are the center of yours: He gets the flu, worries about his aged mother, likes sweets, falls in love – even though he lives half a world away and speaks a different language. To see things from his point of view is to recognize all the particulars that make him human, and ultimately it is to understand that his life is no less valuable than yours. Even in popular entertainments, we're not shown the bad guys at home with their children. One can cheer the death only of a caricature, not of a three-dimensional person.

Less dramatically, many of the social problems we encounter on a daily basis can be understood as a failure of perspective taking. People who litter, or block traffic by double-parking, or rip pages out of library books, seem to be locked into themselves, unable or unwilling to imagine how others will have to look at their garbage, or maneuver their cars around them, or fail to find a chapter they need.

And so while it pains me to read about it, I am not surprised that those who are taught to objectify others in order to kill them retain that mindset and apply it to other aspects of life. Combine the idea that women and children aren't "real people" with real feeling and lives but are instead seen as objects to be used with the military insistence of might makes right and one is left with conditions ripe for abuse. As this study shows that objectification of others and violent imposition of power over them is a sad reality.

What saddens me even more is that most people will assume that the solution to this problem is just to apply more of the same – have the bigger more powerful government impose harsher punishments on offenders. There will be no questioning of the military or their need to murder (that wouldn't be patriotic now would it?) I seriously doubt that lessons in perspective taking will ever catch on in our society, much less our military. So instead of being understood and appreciated as a person, those of us who have faced objectification must continue to live in fear.