Reports | 25 05 2020
I keep attending lectures that help graduate students in the humanities better understand the methods and ethics of scientific research. In one of the sessions, we were asked to write about a well-known person that we disagree with and do not like (the lecturer did not use the word hate).
On a piece of paper, I wrote down the name of someone I dislike and disagree with, and for this person in particular, I actually have all kinds of dark hatred stored in the depths of my psyche. His name is Bashar Al-Assad.
The professor gave me one minute to provide the objective reasons that make me not like this “person.” I built my reasoning around removing the title of “human” from this creature. I said that because of his position, he bears a moral and legal responsibility for what is happening in my country, and that he is a living example of a corrupt, lying, untrustworthy dictator who is in power.
The professor said: Your claim is a combination of personal opinion and emotional impression and now I want you to consider the other side. Suppose that you are loyal or loving or biased toward this “person.” I want you to put yourself in the mindset of someone who loves him, and in one minute, I want you to try to convince those present here that your point of view is compelling.
I laughed at first, then realized how difficult it would be. He encouraged me further to give an honorable attempt, and I told him: this request needs to be carried out by a professional actor who can separate himself from his subject.
He said: this is what you must resolve if you want to become a graduate student. Here we do not want to teach you only how you write scientific papers and conduct scientific research, but we also seek to train you on how to accept “The Other,” regardless of how you disagree with them.
Suppose you are a professor at an institute, and a student submits scientific research to you that successfully follows all of the proper methodology, but its subject and its results are not commensurate with your ethical principles and your political positions. How would you proceed?
Then he said something that made me take a long pause: What you hate is an equal opportunist: it feeds on your hatred, but it also feeds on that which you love.
I think of the state of the country and this sharp division and gash that split us into two halves and two flags and two ideas and the two teams, and I think of the first of the great sentences of the Syrian Revolution: “it’s me and you, not it’s either me or you.”
I think of March 18, 2011 as the inaugural day of a new era of blood in Syrian history— it began with the blood of two martyrs: Mahmoud Al-Jawabra and HussamAyyash. I think of all that has been said and will be said about cause and effect, and how I resolved the matter with my objectivity by placing all blame on that creature who I spoke about above.
But this year I would like to raise the heights of imagination even further, try to forget the pain and bleeding, and try to think of some way to turn this bloody rivalry into something else. Yes, we are divided into two teams, but let us try another kind of competition— let us go for two elected officials playing soccer under the shadow of two flags. Let us give ourselves every right to scream in the stands with all of our strength, with free license to insult the referee.
Let our two teams be marksmen, and instead of seeing the skill of the snipers in the streets and neighborhoods, let us just one time employ them in a fair competition with clay targets, non-human. We also would not mind everyone supporting and bragging about their own shooter, but repeating this Qur’anic phrase is not allowed: “It was not thou who cast when thou cast it, but it was God casted.”
Let us have two teams of runners; an opposition team and one loyal to the regime, instead of those running away from the bombing.
Let us have two teams of swimmers. Let them compete for who is faster and who can break the record, instead of this race to drown.
Let us have two teams of architects to compete over rebuilding our cities and making them more beautiful than they were.
Let us have a complete Syrian Olympiad. Give us a cheering audience— let them scream, and even curse. Let us compete for a thousand medals.
Let us organize a national competition for Syrian culture between the opposition and the supporters of the regime. Let us organize a competition for the best Syrian poet across all schools of poetry, and let us have poets from each side compete. Let us organize a Syrian Booker prize in which writers from both sides submit their works, and another one for the religious on both sides, and the winner is he who glorifies the Qur’an and the human who is created as a perfect image. Let us organize a competition for civil defense people on both sides to show their bravery and their strength. Let us organize a competition for the most beautiful children and adult voices. Let us organize a competition in math, and give awards for the first six places.
Let us organize a competition in wrestling according to international standards. We will all gather in stadiums and each one of us will cheer for his or her favorite athlete. Let us have competitions in karate, judo, wrestling, boxing, and even sumo wrestling. Let us transfer all of our hatred and all of our desire to destroy The Other into sports, music, literature, art, humanitarian aid, teaching kids, and sheltering the displaced.
Let us organize a competition for the most ethical Syrian— one who returns anything that is not his to its owners. Let us start The X Factor Syria to celebrate all the talents of all Syrians.
Let us organize a competition for inventors and for the talented in physics, medicine, and survival skills on both sides. Let us give all the winners honorary medals.
Let us organize competitions for those of Syrians who are the most giving and the most generous on both sides. Let us watch them compete, let each one of us cheer for his or her team, and let each of us carry our own flag. Let us organize a competition for street sweepers and give them the appreciation they deserve for all the work that they have done for the past five years.
In order for this Olympiad to succeed, from each side, we have to prohibit the following from attending: all politicians (with no exception), all the angry media people we see on Television, and all military leaders on all sides. They should all have their hands tied and be locked away until the Olympiad ends.
We have to sign an agreement to be silent, and instead of cursing at each other, we send our teams to compete. We’re not required to love each other, to communicate with each other, or to talk about one country and one people, but rather, we will have fair and honest competitions.
I would here suggest to organize the hardest competition of all: each party would elect a field media team of those who produce documentaries and video reports. Each team, the opposition and supporters of the regime, should document the suffering of the poor and the innocent victims in their respective areas. All of the material should be included in a documentary that would be used to inform the United Nations about Syria.
When the Olympiad is done and after we distribute all of the medals, all the winners will form a transitional government that takes charge of the country. They will form a unified army to expel all those who serve foreign interests and bring all war criminals to justice.
Yes, this idea sounds naive and dreamy, but a little naiveté doesn’t hurt, and dreams do not die.