Zombies vs. Terrorists

While watching an episode of “The Walking Dead” (http://www.amctv.com/shows/the-walking-dead) on netflix.com I was wondering which television show would prove fitting for my topic of violence in the media.  While one of the main characters was wasting a zombie in the face I realized that I had come across the perfect subject matter...  

Now, in the show there is a “zombie apocalypse” and a band of survivors come together out of mutual survival interest in attempt to travel to a safe haven where other remaining humans might be.  Along the way there are many zombie killings and the show doesn’t leave a whole lot up to the imagination when it comes to whether or not the zombie made it out okay or not.  I believe there are some distinct concepts that we can pull from the show and compare to todays world.

For example, the group runs into the last remaining scientist at the Center for Disease Control and during this episode they discover that this zombie virus kills the brain and uses it as a host for this new parasite making these merely human vessels and no longer actual humans.  This I think is an attempt to justify killing them for their own survival needs.  This reminds me of my previous post where I talked about where do we draw the line for what’s justifiable and whats not?  Only in this show they’re trying to determine what qualifies as a human and what doesn’t qualify as a human.  Luckily for the “The Walking Dead” (http://www.amctv.com/shows/the-walking-dead) characters, science has provided a pretty clear answer that the zombies are, indeed, no longer humans. 

I think we do the same thing in war because we no longer see our enemy as “good” so we see it best to kill them for the interest of our own societies safety.  This should raise some moral flags because we are drawing a pretty bold line determining what is black and white in a sea of gray.  There are two pretty significant interests that should be accounted for and both happen to be on opposing sides of this argument. 

On one hand, it’s a pretty bold claim to say that we are worthy of deeming ourselves morally supreme so much that we can go and kill a bunch of people (or zombies) for our own safety interests.  Or in other words, we are superior beings therefore why we should survive outweighs why you should survive so we will kill you.  There are so many cultural differences and the world is now such a small place it’s a recipe for disaster and there are bound to be cases where we butt heads with those who do not see the world as we do.   How we handle these situations is crucial.

On the other hand, if the other group is infringing on our societies safety then something must be done.  For me personally, I don’t care so much if I get attacked because I don’t see my life worth more than someone else’s, so I was a pacifist when it came to war.  But I wasn’t thinking about  the interests of those who don’t have the ability to protect themselves if they saw retaliating a fit course of action (Children, elderly, sick, etc.).  So then I have moral obligation to act out against those who are trying to harm that defenseless group.  At the same time how do I make sure that the people that are fighting on my side aren’t doing the same thing (Harming those who cannot protect themselves) to my enemy (i.e. fighting fairly)?  So then how do we look out for the safety of those who cannot protect themselves without committing the same offense?   Also how do we look out for that defenseless group's interests without removing the enemy’s chance to seek redemption (This is an alternate route as opposed to killing the enemy, attempt at peaceful negotiation)?  Or is there a point where the consequences of your actions must be dealt with in a way where there can be no redemption because you goofed up that bad?  Also, what if the enemy has no interest in anything other than fighting (zombies)?  

I think that fighting is sometimes inevitable and justified but I also believe that we are robbed of our chance of thinking about why we’re fighting because of our cultures readiness to strike out against those that oppose us.  I believe this comes from our society’s subconscious obsession with violence which is reflected in the media, in attempts to sell their shows/movies, which then feeds back into our consumption of thoughtless violence, creating a vicious cycle.  

Media & Violence

I believe there is a general acceptance of violence in society when a situation is spun to have a “bad guy” receiving a “just beating” from a “good guy’’.  We like this violence only if there’s a clear right and wrong, if there’s any ambiguity between the two opposing parties then people stop rooting for either side.  For example two teenagers fighting on the street, we frown upon that almost instantly because of how we view teenagers and their immaturity, we’ll write this off automatically because the causation for this violence must be juvenile.  However, if they were a bit older, one of them had a military uniform on and the other was in “classic bad guy attire” we would immediately start pulling for the person in the military get up.  

Is that type of thought process okay?  Is it something we can work on not doing?  Where do we draw this line for acceptable violence and non acceptable violence?  And if we become okay with seeing this on television shows do we become okay with seeing it on the news?  Are we over trusting of who’s drawing the line for us in real life situations i.e. Modern day wars, riots, law enforcement scandals.  How can we wholeheartedly support certain establishments when we have no idea how news stories are spun to us through the media.  

Obviously the transition from “rooting for Batman to be the bane of Bane” to “should I support this real life conflict”  is a pretty big step and there’s a lot more factors at play in real life then there would be in a movie or television show.  So I suppose a fairly important sub topic for my blog, and all of our blogs for that matter, would be how much does media influence society?  Or the flip question would be, are these movies/shows so popular because they subconsciously tap into something that we already believe therefore we’re predisposed to liking them?

I picked this topic because I used to be pro war,  pro death penalties, and pro punishment of “evil doers” until I had a series of conversations that really challenged me to think about the implications of what those just actions mean and if they truly reflect my beliefs.  I’m not at all opposed to justice, I love justice and I think majority of people inherently do just because it’s how we’re wired.  What has changed is how I feel we should deal with justice.  

The thought of taking someone’s life and their chance at redemption, whatever that may look like, has recently disturbed me quite profoundly.  I think it’s a scary thought because I believe that all humans are products of our environments (some more than others).  So a person can take 2 or 3 desperate moves that started off with good intentions, and now has made them into a killer.  And going along with the cliche “walking in someone else’s shoes” if I had become an evil doer I would want every chance I could take to seek redemption, so therefore I should give everyone else that same chance.  Redemption is a pretty vague term.  I’m not in favor of releasing murderers back into society or anything like that.  I would use the term redemption to mean merely showing remorse and coming to terms with what one did and why it was wrong, and being able to express that to the people whom I’ve cause harm to.

I’m not saying that these beliefs are set in stone, I hope to have interactions with more people through this blog over the course of this semester to challenge each others’ thoughts and come to more of a well thought out opinion.