Rachel Corrie: Bravery or Stupidity?

Discuss this on our boards!

Rachel Corrie: Bravery or Stupidity?
by J. Edward Tremlett, Columnist

April 22, 2003

"Down On the rANT Farm"

J. Edward Tremlett Where does bravery end, and stupidity begin?

I had cause to seriously ponder that when I read about what happened to Rachel Corrie: the 23 year old American who was crushed to death by an Israeli bulldozer the other week. Is it brave or stupid to put yourself between a large piece of war machinery and its intended target?

What actually happened to her depends on who you listen to. Some say she was callously run over and then dumped on by the bulldozer's driver. Others say she slipped, fell and was crushed because the driver couldn't see or hear her. Still others have suggested she actually MEANT to get herself killed... but unless they can come up with some proof to that end then I think we can safely call that bulls@#$.

Of course, these perceptions have all been filtered by the viewpoints of those involved. The people she was protesting with think the Israelis meant to kill her, and she's a hero. Meanwhile, the Israelis she was protesting against say it was an accident, and that she was being irresponsible. Everyone's got a story to sell, here, and I think they've all been tweaked to taste. With something this volatile, that just makes sense.

But what makes no sense at all is how she came to be there, in front of that bulldozer, in the first place. That has to either be extreme bravery or extreme stupidity, and I've been torn over which to call it.

Sometimes, in my more cynical moments, I say the only difference between the two is that the brave ones come out of it alive, while the stupid ones don't. But that's a gross oversimplification: there are a lot of dead men who were very brave, and a lot of stupid ones who are still alive (look at the "Jackass" TV show if you don't believe me)

When I'm being more thoughtful, I think the way we look at it revolves around our own viewpoints on what was going on at the time. What was the underlying situation the action took place within, and what was their relation to it? What did it bring out in these people? And what did they do?

We've all seen those pictures of the Chinese man standing before a line of tanks, during the unrest surrounding the Tiannammen Square massacre. He was able to stop them from going any further, but if he HAD been run over, we'd have called him brave... wouldn't we?

On the other hand, here's Rachel Corrie. She puts herself between a house the IDF is demolishing and the bulldozer doing the deed. Something happens, and then she's lying there, dying. All most of us can think of is if her parents ever taught her to stay away from large, engaged construction equipment? And so we call her stupid.

So what's the big difference between these two incidents, other than the fact that one lived while the other died? It's that one was a native of China standing against that government's Communist army, while the other was a foreigner standing against the Israel Defense Force. Almost everyone in America - at least, almost everyone with any sense - denounces Communism for the sadistic fraud that it is. But when it comes to how Israel comports itself, there's a good bit of division, there.

If you're of the mind that it's wrong to be bulldozing people's houses like that, then Rachel's actions tend to come across as brave, and her death becomes a tragedy. On the other hand, if you think the IDF is right to be doing it, or at least justified under the circumstances, when she was incredibly stupid to be doing that, wasn't she? And to actually travel into that country and put herself in harm's way? Horrors...

That's where my personal conflict comes in. It's not easy for me to call her brave or stupid because it's not easy for me to know how to think about what she was protesting against.

I am no fan of Israel's bulldozers. I think smashing the houses of people whose only crime was having spawned a suicide bomber is mean-spirited and counter-productive. Mean-spirited because it serves no real purpose, except to get revenge on a dead idiot, and counter-productive because it can only inflame tensions even higher, making even more suicide bombers in the process.

But I am also not an Israeli. I don't know what it's like to not even be able to go uptown for a slice of pizza or a cup of coffee without knowing if I'll make it back home alive or not. You keep someone under a condition of siege long enough, and that person will develop a siege mentality. And once you're over that line in the brain, anything becomes feasible and even the unthinkable sounds like a reasonable solution.

I could be on either side of that argument with relative ease. Sometimes my sympathy for one side or the other switches back and forth depending on who did the most stupid thing the last. Sometimes I think I've arrived at a principled stand I can bank on, only to have to washed away by brand new information. It's tough having an open mind!

But I've opened my trap in public and asked a question that demands some kind of an answer. And when I simplify the matter - eschewing the political backdrop for one, basic fact - I am left with the following: if there's a hostile situation between two people, sharing the same land, who just can't get along with one another as things currently stand, then anyone with any common sense could tell you that it is stupid to interject your body between the two sides, and try to keep them from killing one another. You wouldn't get between a cat and a dog having a fight, so why would you put yourself between the IDF and the Palestinians?

So, in the end, I have to go with stupid: very, very stupid. There are numerous, perhaps more effective ways to protest a situation that don't call for you risking your neck. She decided to opt for a more direct, confrontational manner, but there was danger, there, and it cost her life. And what a stupid waste of that life!

Her parents say they're proud of her, and maybe they really are. But if I were them I would be terribly ashamed for not teaching her the difference between being brave and being stupid. Even if the line is sometimes a little blurry, there's something to be said for some basic, common sense - something that was, perhaps, criminally lacking in a certain household. ***

(As a postscript: my wife - also no big fan of how Israel comports itself - looked over my shoulder and made the suggestion that it might not be a question of bravery OR stupidity. Maybe the real culprit here is naivete on Rachel's part? Hopped up on brainfart fumes from college Leftists, and spiked with more of the same from the International Solidarity Movement, maybe she just let herself believe - as many 23 year olds do - that, once embarked on a righteous cause, she was indestructible?

(The problem, here, is that this opens up a whole other can of worms. Bravery can be both naive and fully-informed, and so can stupidity. And this column's gone on long enough as it is! So I'll leave you to ponder that one on your own...) ***

J. Edward Tremlett is a published author, political thinker and self-described "mean-spirited crank." He lives with his wife and two cats in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Photo of J. Edward Tremlett courtesy of staff files