The illusion of the saintly victim.

RichardH

The classic example of this are the Salifists in Afghanistan. When under the boot of the Soviets, they were plucky, morally pure, freedom fighters. Their Pashtun ethnicity was mythologized as tall, handsome, fierce, and faithful. Once they prevailed over the Soviets they promptly struggled to attain power, and once achieving it they put their boot on others even harder than the Soviets did. Currently the Israeli's hold the power over the Palestinians. Therefore the Israelis are perceived as morally lowered, and the Palestinians as morally elevated. There is nothing inherently morally inferior or superior about either the Israelis and Palestinians... they are no different in that way.. none of us are.. but one has power and means and other does not... Therefore the Palestinians have the glow of saintly victimhood and the israelis the shadow of oppressor. This has nothing to do with justice... the justice of a situation may be clearcut.. but the generalization of moral perception around the players is illusory.

The innocent kid in Florida who was shot by a vigilantly was no doubt just a regular kid... morally mixed.. no saint, no devil. But victimhood has conferred a glow of Sainthood on him. Once again the justice of the situation may be clear cut, but the moral nature of the players is not.

When someone is an oppressor we screen out their virtues, when someone is a victim we screen out their vices.. In time oppressor and victim will cycle around, and the moral grayness of human nature evens out. When we take a position on a conflict, which may be a just position, we also on an emotional level elevate the general moral nature of the victim, and lower the general moral nature of the aggressor or oppressor. It is so in every situation, every conflict we see.

IronRabbit

There is an exception to "saintly victimhood" in what psychologists call "the just world fallacy"(you get what you deserve) - assigning negative moral value to those who suffer. The "blame the victim" script usually emanates from a patriarchal, xenophobic, homophobic, white supremacist source - the ever present "right wing". As a fixture in the western worldview this usually privileged segment of society is staunchly grounded in collective madness.

Media sources that chafe at being regarded as "liberal" feel pathologically obligated to derail stories such as the young black man's killing in FL if they point to "racism" because it is deemed "unpalatable". The rush to deny that racism could exist in the 21st century is the epitome of right wing propagandist denial.

True, liberals are much less prone to victim blaming than conservatives but aren't these positions really just mirror images of the need for a "position" - the need to be "right"?
Further - a denial that something terribly wrong could be viewed as justifiable?

The grayness of human nature may be the problem here. I don't know.

http://prospect.org/article/willful-ignorance-1

genkaku

Gautama Buddha was a really, really, really, really ... nice guy.

I, you, he/she/it are no where near so nice.

I imagine.

RichardH

There is an exception to "saintly victimhood" in what psychologists call "the just world fallacy"(you get what you deserve) - assigning negative moral value to those who suffer. The "blame the victim" script usually emanates from a patriarchal, xenophobic, homophobic, white supremacist source - the ever present "right wing". As a fixture in the western worldview this usually privileged segment of society is staunchly grounded in collective madness.

Media sources that chafe at being regarded as "liberal" feel pathologically obligated to derail stories such as the young black man's killing in FL if they point to "racism" because it is deemed "unpalatable". The rush to deny that racism could exist in the 21st century is the epitome of right wing propagandist denial.

True, liberals are much less prone to victim blaming than conservatives but aren't these positions really just mirror images of the need for a "position" - the need to be "right"?
Further - a denial that something terribly wrong could be viewed as justifiable?

The grayness of human nature may be the problem here. I don't know.

http://prospect.org/article/willful-ignorance-1

I'm not quite sure how this post relates to the O.P. The justice or injustice of a situation is not what I am talking about.. I am not saying everyone is inherently nice, or that some people are inherently bad, while others are inherently good.... not saying anything like that. Not avoiding the calling out of destructive views or values either... Just noticing the auto-teeter totter of moral perception.. one goes down and one goes up..