Stardate 20011019.0930 (On Screen): Upon reading James Lileks' latest column, it occurred to me that those who are making excessive attempts to understand the other side and look for deeper causes (i.e. to figure out reasons why they did this to us because of evil things we ourselves did earlier) are actually demonstrating moral cowardice. One of the most difficult things to do is to
take sides: to look at a conflict, to decide that one participant is better than the other, and then to commit to that side and take the consequences of that decision.
Those who plead with us that the situation is complicated and that we need to try to understand the enemy; what these people are actually trying to do is to stand apart from the conflict and remain neutral. They refuse to make a commitment and try to claim virtue for their equivocation. It becomes a way of rationalizing not getting involved: if both sides are morally equivalent and equally culpable, then there is no good reason to take any risks on behalf of either. (discuss)
