|
by Norman Fulkerson
It is said a picture is worth a thousand
words, but a well chosen word can make an otherwise clear
picture, quite obscure.
This became very evident for me recently
as I read an Associated Press article1
about how 76 insurgents were killed in fierce fighting. For
some time now, I have been asking myself, what on earth is
an insurgent? It sounds like one of those euphemistic expressions,
seen so often in print, intended to make cutthroat terrorist
look less terrifying. They become even less terrifying when
later in the article they are referred to as mere "suspected
insurgents."
Calling terrorists "suspected
insurgents" strongly suggests that our troops are killing
innocent people. Such language implies that a courtroom-like-investigation
has to be carried out to determine whether a suspected terrorist
is really a terrorist or just a Muslim that happens to like
wearing a bomb around his waist and a rifle over his shoulder.
Explanation of the Talismanic word
Using the word "insurgent" in
the place of terrorist would not mean much to me had it not
been for the study, Unperceived
Ideological Transshipment and Dialogue,2
by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira.
This treatise first appeared in print in
the mid-sixties when heated debates about communism were common.
In this masterful study, Prof. Corrêa de Oliveira showed
how the use of the word "dialogue" in the place
of a sharper word such as "debate" was instrumental
in dissolving the differences between opposing sides of a
philosophical debate. Thus, a fiery anticommunist could be
"transshipped" into one who wants only to make compromises,
concessions, and retreats."3
The ability of the word "dialogue"
to influence psychologically and imperceptibly the public
gave the word a talismanic or "magical" quality.
Prof. Corrêa de Oliveira thus labeled such terms as
"talismanic words."
Today, talismanic words continue to be
very useful tools in altering people's perspectives.
As homosexuals become "gays" and
illegitimate relationships become "alternative lifestyles,"
the resistance to a sinful life is hampered. Abortion no longer
kills a uniquely magnificent, genetically distinct pre-born
baby but a de-individualized "fetus." Those who
support the elimination of a "fetus" are no longer
pro-abortion but defenders of "choice." Anyone attempting
to uphold morality runs the risk of being branded "insensitive."
The power or magic of the talismanic word
comes from its elasticity. They are resistant to definition.
It is therefore by defining words such as "insurgent"
that we can strip them of the power they have to influence.
There are three ways we can do this.
Dictionary definition
The most logical way would be to see what
Webster's has to say. Under the main entry, an insurgent is:
"a person who revolts against civil authority or an
established government; especially : a rebel not recognized
as a belligerent." Videotaped recordings of gruesome
decapitations carried out by Iraqi "insurgents"
are well beyond the concept of belligerent.
 |
| Like the minutemen a true insurgent
rises up against an established tyranny |
Those concerned about the Geneva Convention
and the insufficiently air- conditioned jail cells in Guantanamo
might appreciate a more legalistic definition such as that
provided by a New York law dictionary. An insurgent is:
"One who is concerned in an insurrection. He differs
from a rebel in this, that rebel is always understood in a
bad sense…insurgent may be one who justly opposes the
tyranny of constituted authorities. The colonists who opposed
the tyranny of the English government were insurgents, not
rebels."4
The colonial reference used here is very
important because the understanding of words often extends
beyond etymology and encompasses their historic usage.
Historical examples
A second way to understand insurgent is to
cite historical examples.
In the fifteenth century, for example, Albanians
who resisted the Ottoman Empire and the tyranny of Sultan
Amurath II were commonly referred to as insurgents. In fact,
they carried out such an effective insurgency that the Sultan
kidnapped young Catholic boys and incorporated them into his
army as an elite force called the janissaries5.
One such boy was nine-year-old George Castriota,
son of Prince John of Castriota.6 He was given
the Turkish name of Alexander the Prince or "Iskender
Bey" and later came to be known among the Albanians as
Scanderbeg. Upon escaping from the Turks, he led the Albanians
in a successful insurgency that became so noteworthy that
history often refers to him simply as the "Sword and
Shield of Christendom."7
A more recent example is the Lithuanian
insurgents at the end of World War II. As part of the infamous
Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, the Soviet Union swallowed up this
Catholic country known as the "Land of Mary."
Fr. Pranas Dauknys describes how, "the Catholic Church
immediately lost its legal rights as the Soviet Communist
government gradually introduced Soviet Russian laws concerning
religious denominations …Arrests, tortures and executions,
the sudden disappearance of leading personalities in public
life without a trace became an everyday occurrence."
Mass deportations were carried out in June
of 1941. In that month alone 40,000 people were shipped off
to labor camps in Siberia. Lithuania was rapidly becoming
a mere colony of Russia and her desperation was matched only
by the nobility of the reaction that followed.
After Germany attacked Russia later that
same month, Father Dauknys tells how "a spontaneous and
general revolt against Soviet rule [occurred]…and the
insurgents succeeded in taking full control of chief
cities and provincial towns."8
The inhabitants of the Land of Mary were
thus temporarily spared from further atrocities due to a group
of people aptly defined as insurgents. When the Soviets regained
their control over Lithuania after the war, insurgents continued
their just struggle against this cruel oppressor.
"Remember the Alamo"
Two more examples strike closer to home.
In the twenties and thirties, the Mexican cristeros forcibly
resisted an anti-Catholic government which, like the Soviets
in Lithuania, persecuted the Church. These irregular forces
are also referred to as insurgents. Sympathetic Americans
who traveled there to assist them were similarly labeled insurgents.9
At home, Texas experienced the tyranny of
Mexican military dictator Antonio López de Santa Anna.
This is given as yet another historic example of an insurgency.
You don't have to be Texan to appreciate the bravado of Colonel
William Travis who courageously faced overwhelming odds.
"To the People of Texas and all Americans
in the world" he wrote, "I shall never surrender
or retreat...Victory or Death!" Their heroic resistance
at the Alamo in San Antonio is responsible for buying sufficient
time for General Sam Houston's arrival which ultimately won
Texas its independence.10
It is exactly the resiliency displayed by
these Texan insurgents which drives Americans when placed
in difficult circumstances, like September 11, to cry: "Remember
the Alamo."
A trip to the Mall
My third way to understand the term insurgent
is to ask others.
What has been said so far could easily be
considered a subjective opinion of a person who has a hang
up with a word. It was for this reason that I conducted my
own miniature public opinion poll at a local mall near York,
Penn. What better place to find a cross section of the American
public than a mall. Although the fifteen people I interviewed
would not get a notice from Gallup, the consistency of the
responses was more than noteworthy.
My initial hesitation in this undertaking
was whether people would feel comfortable talking about terrorists
in the midst of the delightfully non-threatening environment
of an American mall.
All fears were put to rest as I approached
two elderly men sitting on a bench engrossed in conversation.
My only problem with them was getting them to stop talking.
One of them, a 61-year-old retiree from York, said insurgent
was a "misleading word" meant to present terrorist
as "people who are not bad." He went on to add that
it was a clearly "deceptive" word which leads the
person to believe "these people are fighting for a just
cause."
Keith Kefauver, a 45-year-old retired Air
Force sergeant, went straight to the point. Referring to terrorists
as insurgents was "the media's way to portray the bad
guys." The impression given by the word insurgent, he
commented, makes them look like "freedom fighters."
An English teacher from Hanover was happy
to comment on the value of words and understood that, although
an insurgent is defined as someone who takes part in an armed
rebellion, it has been historically used to define those who
rebel against a tyrannical regime like "those who fought
in the American Revolution." She, like most people I
spoke with, had a sense that an insurgent is more commonly
understood as someone fighting for a noble cause.
All those questioned considered that, of
the two terms, terrorist is the more negative or sharper word.
One elderly man said the word terrorist, "struck a cord
with me" alluding to the fact that it was a frightening
term. "I am a soldier", he continued, "and
I never heard the term [insurgent] before." He was obviously
not old enough to have fought in the Revolutionary War.
The most interesting person I interviewed,
however, was 36-year-old Kathy Pavoncello. She is a freelance
writer with the Hanover Sun newspaper and obviously
free enough to give an unbiased opinion. She admitted that
the idea she had of an insurgent "changed over the years"
because of the way they are being consistently portrayed.
She was quick to point out the irregularities of the current
"insurgents" in Iraq. To begin with, most of those
fighting in Iraq are foreigners. They do not wear uniforms
and systematically avoid engaging the "invaders"
in combat. They prefer rather to use suicide bombers11
who kill innocent civilians, including women and children
on a daily basis.
The Battle for Hearts and Minds
It would be very difficult to find a more
heated debate than the one surrounding national security.
It dominated the debates which propelled President Bush into
a second term. Americans felt safer with a president who was
not afraid to declare a "war on terror."
At the center of this debate is the war in
Iraq and a well-chosen word capable of swaying public opinion.
When a terrorist becomes an "insurgent," the resolve
to fight is severely weakened. Nothing is more useful for
the opponents of the war than the use of such a powerful talismanic
word.
There is no better example of this than the
tragic bombings in London, so similar to those in Madrid last
year. In all the news coverage of this most recent act of
terrorism, one word was very conspicuous for its absence.
The word insurgent was not used a single time. Reporters called
them exactly what they are: terrorists. Yet what is the difference
between those who bombed innocent civilians in London and
those who are killing innocent civilians in Iraq? In the former
case the terrorists faced only frightened civilians in the
latter they face determined soldiers.
Those with a declaredly liberal mindset
have a serious problem not only with the war in Iraq but war
in general and the military specifically. In the post-September
11 world, however, to make a frontal assault against our military
is tantamount to being un-patriotic.
Proof of this was the tsunami of indignation
which recently engulfed Sen. Dick Durbin and forced him to
apologize "to our fine men and women in the military"
for his inflammatory and unjust remarks. He compared the treatment
we give our prisoners at Gitmo to the slaughter carried out
by a genocidal maniac like Pol Pot.12
Our soldiers who fight terrorists in the
Middle East did not choose the field of battle yet fight with
a nobility that is often overlooked. They deserve our undying
respect and gratitude but unfortunately what they are getting
in the press back home is word manipulation which can only
be seen as deceptive.
The word "dialogue" was arguably
a useful tool in weakening the anti-communist resistance in
the 60's. The word "insurgent" is an equally useful
one to weaken the resistance of Americans in the struggle
we wage against terrorism.
Alongside the deadly conflicts in Iraq and
Afghanistan there is a more important struggle being waged
right here at home. It is a battle for the hearts and minds
of Americans. With the widespread use of a talismanic word,
it appears obvious that some people are visibly uncomfortable
with our desire to win these wars.
| 
