Doing bad for the greater good

I am a big House of Cards fan.  Whether or not it is how business in Washington really gets done, it is how I would like to picture it.  If all politics is theatre, it is refreshing to see what happens backstage.  It is nice to be able to believe that, despite the chaos we see on camera, there is order in the background - or at least excessively wise and meticulous characters trying to construct order.  Those who find the characters morally repugnant, I think, miss the point of the show.  If they tried to do good at every turn, they would accomplish very little.  While they are putting their own moral standing in question, they are fighting for larger progress.  As the tagline of the show says, they are "Doing bad for the greater good."

This week's chapter is called "The White Rider."  In it Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli enter Fangorn and find, much to their surprise, Gandalf, who has returned from his battle with the Balrog.  Gandalf tells them Merry and Pippin are safe, and that they have been found by Treebeard, who will look out for them.  At this, Gimli speaks up:

'But you speak of [Treebeard] as if he was a
friend. I thought Fangorn was dangerous.'

'Dangerous!' cried Gandalf.  'And so am I, very dangerous

more dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought

before the seat of the Dark Lord.  And Aragorn is dangerous,

and Legolas is dangerous.  You are beset with dangers,

Gimli son of Gloin, for you are dangerous yourself!

Because we've spent the whole story on the same side as Gimli, et al, it doesn't occur to us to call them dangerous.  They don't pose any threat to the Quest.  It is the Nazgul, the orcs, Saruman who are truly dangerous.  But not our heroes - they are acting selflessly in order to save the world.  The only reason 'danger' comes to our mind is because other things are trying to kill them!  They are the ones in danger.

But that viewpoint is very narrow.  The whole reason they're able to defeat their enemies is because they are dangerous.  Capable, strong, resilient, determined and dangerous.  We mourn the passing of Boromir, but hardly bat an eyelash when a whole horde of Uruk-Hai are killed by the Rohirrim.  After all, they're just getting what's coming to them, right?  But a death is a death.

It comes down, really, to this: Heroes hurt bad guys.  As that article notes:  "The troops are heroes. They protect our freedom. They're making the great sacrifices so we don't have to."  While the previous sentence may be true, surely that isn't the only way to protect our freedom.  There are doctors, who help us live longer (it is hard to be free if you are dead).  There are diplomats who prevent wars in the first place.  But these people are not seen as heroes, certainly not with the same vigor.  We can debate whether doctors or diplomats are heroes.  The troops just are.  If you even attempt to debate it, you have already lost.

And yet, we don't view our troops as dangerous.  They are heroes, willing to put their lives before our own.  Willing to go to the far reaches of the globe while we stay home, protecting us against threats we don't even know exist.  They are entirely selfless.  And while that may be true, it overlooks a major point.  Part of their job is, inherently, hurting people.  Bad people, yes, but people nonetheless.  Deaths are deaths.  And even if the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, a gun is still involved.  Even if you know what you're doing, a gun is dangerous.  Hell, a gun is dangerous because you know what you're doing.  A toddler with a gun is a very bad idea.  A trained marksman with a gun, however, is far more capable.

So it is with our heroes.  We do not idolize Gandalf and the Hunters because they are peaceful - we idolize them because they are capable of stopping the Enemy.  And the Enemy is dangerous.  And so they must be, too.  They must be.  If they weren't dangerous, if they weren't capable of fighting the Enemy, Middle Earth wouldn't have a chance.

In our society now, danger is seen as inherently bad.  Criminals are dangerous.  Police are not.  And if you call them dangerous, you are not saying it in praise.  But if criminals are dangerous, our police must be dangerous, too.  Otherwise our police wouldn't be able to stop them.  

This chapter challenges us to rethink what it means to be dangerous.  Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the presence of justice.  And justice requires hard work.  You do not achieve justice by never fighting - you do it by forging connections.  And this work, sometimes, requires fighting an Enemy.  And, sadly, you cannot always kill 'em with kindness.  Sometimes, heroes have to hurt bad guys.  But we can't call them brave for facing the bad guys and call it a day.  After all, if the bad guys had killed our heroes, we wouldn't call them brave, and yet they would be.  Anyone who decides to square off against Gandalf must be brave.  

I'm not saying we need to revere our opponents as much as we do our own heroes.  I'm saying we need to lower our reverence for our own heroes.  To our enemies, they are not heroic - they are dangerous.  And yet what is the difference?  If the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, who's to say who is good and who is bad?  In the world of civilian shootings, it is a bit obvious.  But what about on the battlefield?  How can you, objectively, determine which side is more justified?  I don't think you can.

Our text is going to explore the complexities of war more deeply as the story continues.  The Creative Wizard, of course, was a soldier in World War I.  We will continue to be challenged in our thinking of war, soldiers, and victory.  For now, I will leave you with this.  We have been rooting constantly for the side of the Free Peoples without a moment's thought to what the Shadow desires.  One the one hand, the Shadow wishes to wipe the Free People's from Middle Earth.  But the Free Peoples seek to do the same, and in fact to destroy an ancient relic (The Ring) to ensure the Enemy's destruction.  Who's to say the Shadow, once the Free Peoples are destroyed, won't end their war, and set up orc schools and post offices?  Why, precisely, are we on the side of the Free Peoples...

I'm not saying the Shadow is justified in what they want.  I'm saying the Free Peoples may not be.  They are, indeed, doing bad for the greater good.