Proudly Presents
The 2005-2006 Third Place Essay

   

     In examining the current state of world affairs we can plainly see that belief, expressed through blindly followed religious and political faith, is at least partly responsible for the mess we find ourselves in. Our planet's health is rapidly declining due to the mismanagement of resources and chemical by-products of our pillaging.
Most modern civilizations and individuals continue to live as though nature's bounty were truly boundless, believing there will always be more trees, salmon, oil, and clean water. Eons-old fighting in the Holy Lands is perpetuated as missiles are fired between Gaza and Israel. Self-righteous faith is used to justify continued killings in feuds older than our greatest grandparents. Ours is a perilous age, and today journalists, poets, and other writers contnue to use their literary talents to speak out against the dangers of a society guided by faith. Two such authors are E. M. Forster and Pete Hamill.

Forster lived through the passing of two world wars in his native England and served with the Red Cross in WWI. He was no stranger to the terrors of the battlefield, having witnessed the brutalities of government-sanctioned slaughter. A writer for more than half a century, Forster accumulated a respectable body of work including Two Cheers for Democracy in which he writes, "I do not believe in belief (Forster)." In this piece Forster advocated for Democracy but warns against its pitfalls. He demonstrates a conviction that, "No form of Christianity and no alternative to Christianity will bring peace to the world of integrity to the individual (Forster)."

One danger Forster warns of in his essay is the evaporation of individual freedoms, particularly freedom of speech. One of the merits of Democracy, he writes, is that it allows citizens to criticize their government. "These are strenuous and serious days," however, Forster cautions, "and one likes to say what one thinks while speech is comparatively free; it may not be free much longer (Forster)." Congress's current debate over the Patriot Act shows that the battle over citizens' rights is far from over.

If asked most people claim to value their freedoms, to the point where the mere word is a call to arms, the reassurance of supreme authority. "We must defend our freedom. They (the enemies) hate us for our freedom." You may have heard similar rhetoric in recent Presidential addresses. These are indeed serious days, where freedom is lauded, worth killing and dying for, while at the same time it is chiseled away by legislation. All this goes largely unchallenged by the American populace.

How is such hypocrisy and blindness possible? The answer, of course, is faith. A significant portion of the public goes along with what it is told because faith has a tight hold on the collective will: we believe the slant on the evening news, and the campaign promises. Faith allows entire nations to operate in complacency and at the mercy of dictators. Until the public as a whole is willing to challenge the powerful elite, or at least holds them accountable, the world will continue to be ruled by whomever is willing to be the most ruthless.

Forster, as evidenced in his essay on Democracy, did not believe in belief. He did not believe that faith has the power to bring about peace in the world, because it stagnates the mind and invites inaction. Americans' faith in Democracy, in their supreme authority in world politics, both prepared the soil for the Iraq War and has allowed it continue to this day.

Pete Hamill has written more recently on similar themes. As a journalist and war correspondent Hamill has covered fighting all over the world, and has spoken out against the deadly link between faith and war. He has called "belief the great killer,: because as he has seen, "Political belief has slaughtered millions. Religious belief has slaughtered the rest (Hamill, unknown)."

In an article written in January, 2002, eight months before the World Trade Center bombings, Hamill wrote of dark days to come for the United States. Most of Bush's first term still lay ahead but Hamill could see the writing on the wall and his translation was bleak at best: "We should all be prepared for the sight of corpses (Hamill)."

As 2005 comes to a close the Middle East is awash in fighting, both ancient and newly kindled. In the Gaza conflict the boundary between religious and political motives is often imperceptible. It is a complicated situation for many reasons, where fires are fanned with a hatred generations of Jews and Palestinians have felt for one another because of perceived differences in faith. Strange that, in war, God seems to be on everybody's side.

American citizens followed their President into another Gulf War, believing it is necessary and that Bush will steer the country righteously. As a result tens of thousands have died in Iraq including more than two thousand American troops. Why did extensive polls originally show that the majority approved of Bush's decision to war? Because the public believed in the presence of weapons of mass destruction, though no physical evidence could be found of their presence on Iraq. For a while the public even believed Saddam Hussein had somehow conspired to level the Twin Towers. Turns out it was not him after all, but in the minds of the majority the enemy is still whomever the government
and media point a finger at.

Only fervent faith can motivate people to continue to believe something when all evidence demonstrates they are just plain wrong. Logic on the other hand demands we question, investigate, and scrutinize. If a certain news story or political candidate does not hold up under scrutiny it should be abandoned in favor of a solution evidenced to work in reality. Giving God status to anything, be it technology or the Commander in Chief, is always a perilous position.

Forster saw that killing in the name of one's beliefs prevents the world situation from ever improving. In fact, because of population booms and new war technologies, he saw that, "The world may well get worse (Forster)." Forster and Hamill set an example for the responsible modern citizen. They were critical thinkers, not satisfied to simply accept the status quo when they had seen the at-times murderous cost. They were well aware of the consequence of trusting in belief, and have proclaimed that if Humankind is to survive we must trade passive faith for social conscience and responsible action.