EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- One American Who Isn't For Sale
- Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- The Judicial Lynching of Bradley Manning
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
Popular content
Today's Top News
Healing the Wounds: Transforming Our Culture of Violence
Whatever your political leanings, you’d have to be incredibly hardhearted not to be moved by the shooting in Tucson that claimed the lives of a federal judge and a nine year old girl, among others, and critically wounded Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Some will attempt to politicize this episode as emblematic of the poverty of the “other side,” whereas others will seek to depoliticize it as the work of a deranged “lone gunman.” Meanwhile, moderate voices will be raised aghast at the violence in our midst, both of the rhetorical and spectacular varieties, and many will attempt to draw a direct link between the two. And still, in all likelihood, all of this will soon fade into the collective rear-view mirror and slide down the news queue, as the “normal” state of business as usual adjusts to a new equilibrium that encourages a reestablished complacency. 
The inherent cynicism in this narrative is bolstered by its likely occurrence, given America’s reaction to previous calamities. Yet this episode seems different, more personal in its up-close intentions, and jarring in its depiction of innocent people gunned down at a neighborhood supermarket while practicing the elusive virtues of representative democracy in a way that will be largely unavailable going forward. For along with the victims on that Arizona tarmac lies our own innocence as well, replaced by the carefully avoided specter of our collective contributions to what Hannah Arendt once referred to as the “banality of evil.”
In this sense, we must acknowledge the blood on all of our hands. We blithely exist in a culture of violence at almost every level, from our food and entertainment to the economy and what passes for politics. The better part of our creative and pecuniary energies alike are expended on the ceaseless operations of a military machine that we service as human cogs rendered before an insatiable Moloch. As much as we are able, the cultural violence that we proliferate is exported, outsourced, externalized, and rationalized in the name of progress and exceptionalism. Within this rubric, few among us are truly evil, but are merely living our lives along predetermined lines of common virtue. There is nothing shocking or extraordinary about this; it is, after all, quite acceptably mundane.
Yet now, in this brief moment of engaged horror and empathy, it seems as if the consequences of our actions (and inactions) have “come home to roost,” so to speak. We can blame this solely on right-wing fanaticism and the irresponsible rhetoric that fans the flames of violence. We can attribute it to the overall climate that has taken hold in places like Arizona, that trial balloon of reactionary political hijacking that could portend the opening salvo in a new civil war. We can point fingers at everyone from Beck and Bush to Obama and O’Reilly, and even reserve special mention for Palin as a paragon of pusillanimous politicking. We can deliver recriminations upon the gun dealers, dope peddlers, media moguls, hate groups, and more. And we most likely will, in our search for sense where none seems to exist.
We will, in short, place blame on everyone but ourselves — even as we watch the programs and punch the ballots, buy the products and consume the cuisine, tell the jokes and repeat the slurs, drive the cars and close the gates. Moderates will call for peace and civility, and we will nod in thankful agreement. Moments of silence and memorial remembrances will bring a lump to our throats and a tear to our eyes, even as the flag of national expediency slowly subsumes the genuine emotions of compassion and fear. Most of us will say and do all the right things, except the one thing that most needs doing: healing the wounds, not merely by dressing them, but also by undoing the capacity and desire to inflict them again.
This is not a call for restoring the tepid peace of complicity. Nor is it a wishful longing that people will suddenly become nice and pathologies instantly cured. We are not going to dismantle all the weapons of war and melt down the multitudes of guns any time soon. Conflicts of all sorts will be with us as long as we draw breath, both individually and civilizationally speaking. No, this is not a plea for moderation and placidity — in fact, precisely the opposite.
What I am suggesting here is a sober assessment of the task and an honest appraisal of our shared wounds. The starting point must be a deep recognition that it is us — and not just “them” — who kill people, including ourselves, as surely as if we had pulled the trigger in a crowded public place. We do it silently, remorselessly, and without expectation of punishment (indeed, the better we are at it, the more likely we are to be rewarded). The cultural ethos of competition, domination, consumption, and disposability pits us not only against one another, but against the life-giving properties of the habitat itself. As such, our wounds of trauma and tribulation are largely self-inflicted, not the products of the deranged among us but rather those of the perfectly sane.
Thomas Merton reflected on this theme in the context of warfare, concluding that it is actually an overabundance of rationality more so than its lack that makes violence possible. When we suborn violence, either tacitly or overtly, as a mechanism for accomplishing everything from a good dinner to global dominion, we merely sanction its use by others as a tool for achieving whatever aim they may deem desirable. When we allow the structural violence of gross inequity and caste-based marginalization to pervade unchallenged, we thereby encourage others to divide and conquer as well. Rational beings will take heed as aggression is rewarded and cooperation denigrated, and duly note that success is measured by how much one possesses vis-a-vis others in the relentless zero-sum contest of modern life.
Despite this accumulated cultural baggage, we can and must heal the wounds of this violence in our midst — not by burying it or displacing it, but by owning it and learning to live with it. Just as the hardware of destruction will not be abolished in any short-term reality, nor will the software of hatred, fear, aggression, and despair suddenly vanish. The question is whether we can acknowledge these capacities without exacerbating them, and likewise whether we will be able to accept the challenge of keeping the literal and metaphorical weapons of violence with us always as reminders of that which we have consciously decided to reject. This, then, is the imminent and paradoxical task before us: to retain our inherent ability to inflict harm on ourselves, others, and the world, and yet in the process create a culture that renders anathema the utility and desirability of doing so.
Others before us have faced similar dilemmas. Now, with the virtue of clarity inspired by tragedy, we have a unique opportunity to embrace another vision. We can and must make this a great turning, away from a culture forever reacting to self-inflicted wounds and toward one that grows stronger and more mature with each passing challenge. It will be the greatest test ever faced by humankind, and it is entirely necessitated by the staggering power we have attained to undermine our very existence. Still as yet unrealized is an equally vast capacity to promote well-being at all levels through our compassion, innovation, and recognition of the other in ourselves.
Which path will we choose? Herein lies the cultural crucible broached by the Arizona shootings, namely the shared opportunity to avoid self-destruction and instead embrace mutually-assured survival. Our collective healing hangs precariously in the balance, and awaits our overdue engagement with its transformative potential.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
174 Comments so far
Show AllI have always looked upon these shootings which are really quite common as a tny bit of justice for all the innocents killed by Americans around the world because most if not all of the victims of US aggression are too weak to ever fight back against the evil empire being forced to use terrorist tactics to have any effect at all. In any event Americans are a very people and one can only hope they turn more on themselves and leave the rest of the world alone.
This is a sick, perverse comment.
Is this the only view you have from your window? Or do you also have good to look upon? If you have only this view you might get up and go watch some children playing on the play ground with mothers, fathers, aunts and uncles looking on in joy. Walk around a neighborhood and see the gentle and pervasive goings on in mundane life, or take a walk in nature where life of a soothing kind abounds. Here and all across the world, these happy and good times and places abound. You need only look for all this good amongst minor acts of bad and they will show them selves to you. As much as our attention is often rivited on evil, destruction and crime, good is still outnumbering bad by a long shot on any given day.
Leea,
"or take a walk in nature where life of a soothing kind abounds." Life of a soothing kind, eh? What about the field mouse who has just been eaten by a coyote, hawk, or owl? What about the earthworm plucked from the ground and swallowed by the robin? What about the young zebra with a lioness attached to its neck as the other lions wait to fight to get at the best parts? What of the lion cub that is eaten by the new dominant male in the area so that the lioness goes into heat? Etc. . . ?
No, "life of a soothing kind" does not "abound" in nature. Maybe in your sanitized mental version yes, but not in reality.
OYE
Yeah, natural events like that cannot be controlled, and nature can offer much solace indeed. In fact, as many countless hours as I've spent in nature, i've never witnessed the act of one animal killing another except for a very few times. Maybe two or three.
"go watch some children playing on the play ground with mothers, fathers, aunts and uncles looking on in joy. "
then imagine a pilotless drone plane dropping its payload in their midst, imagine the body parts of your loved ones, the blood, the reek--this goes on everyday thanks to those good people who brought you shock and awe.
It's a universal law, you will reap what you sow, and this nation has some really nasty crops ready for harvest. And just as we passively watched our troops gun down innocent people, we "innocent" "good" Amercans will passively be swept up in the horrors to come.
Stopping the madness begins with troop withdrawal and reparations to the nations we've destoyed.
You got there before I did, with a similar sick feeling about all this hand-wringing self-pity. Yes - the answer to this is stop all the wars and end the insane US military and the fascist corporate control of government.
When I was a kid, the War Department got about $40 billion or so in funding - and that was for a more than skeleton army. Time to end the trillions bleeding this society dry - then it wouldn't be so sick, or broke(n). Time for people working in weapons industries to walk away and find a DECENT job - or for the rest of us to start picketing their houses and their death factories. Maybe there's still time to avoid an end like that of Nazi Germany... but we've got to stop the weapons from being built in the first place, then stop them from being deployed. We have to look at this country as Nazi America, just as heinous as Nazi Germany - and end the atrocities!
armybrat, believe it or not I like you. I feel you have a lot of good to give, you are obviosly very passionate and care a lot.
My input in agreement to you is that the outcome of finally getting it right will be an end to wars of pre-meditated agression and or pre-meditated murder, and or all forms of violence that are a by product of humans out of balance with their nature. Also the rule of corporations who behave in a way that is out of balance to all of nature will surely end. One way or another, we can be sure of that.
We should be exactly as concerned about this as you are. But that concern will need to be focused with razor sharp intelligence and wisdom to find out exactly the way to effect a change. This deep systematic understanding has not been reached, a fact we are all aware of and deeply frusterated by. I have some good ideas though of how to start this. I look forward to the dialogue here and elsewhere that can further this shared goal.
Peace
Yeah, I recommend walking around a neighborhood where most of the people are employed in the weapons industry. See how innocent their children look? See how much their parents seem to love them - even as they manufacture death for someone else's children. And those cute kids - how many will join the US military and slaughter innocent men, women, and children in some faraway land? How many will go to college and then invent and even more diabolical methods of murdering innocent people. How many will become leaders, politicians, or new workers in those factories of doom? Yeah, go out to that neighborhood and meet the American Nazi - just like the German Nazi. Visit the corporate (fascist) death factory while you're at it - the new Auschwitz. Because that's what I think of when I look at my neighbors - and hear the way they talk. And that's what I think of when I hear the fascist screeds, so familiar to anyone who knows Nazi history. They sound just like Hitler, Goebbels, and the rest of the vile and heinous henchmen that destroyed Europe and half of Russia with their 'might military machine' - just listen to them.
Sorry, Thalidomide, but I suggest you strive to refine this chaotic and illogical thought, or abandon it and start again from scratch.
All I can get out of it is that you're seeing a kind of karmic blowback at work, although you don't use the term. That is, you seem to be saying that the slaughter of Amerikan innocents represents a kind of "justice" for the non-Amerikan innocents slaughtered by Amerika or its surrogates. And that Amerika is inhabited by a particularly depraved, monstrous people.
Huh? Who is "owning" the "justice" you believe are evidenced in these atrocities? Do you believe that each nation-state or culture has a daemon, or god, jealously keeping score of its own victims and sporadically succeeding in returning the favor?
I'm as appalled as anyone by Ugly Amerika, and even sympathetic to the view that most Amerikans are oblivious to, or in denial of, our collective monstrosity. I even agree with the notion expressed by such diverse radicals as Malcom X and Ward Churchill that inevitably the "chickens come home to roost".
But that's not "justice", it's exactly the opposite: the bitter fruits of the cycle of violent INjustice.
KAT: If you understood the law of karma, you would recognize that it is anything BUT the denial of personal responsiblity. There are many layers or levels of karma; and one of them is tied to the nation, as entity. In that respect, some of the suffering drawn from natural events, along with that which results from a purposely failed (or compromised) economic system, appear to reflect the essence of karmic blowback.
I would not tie karmic blowback to this particular event; although Arizona's whole hate-based mindset is creating its own karmic reverberations. When Reagan was shot, it led to a new initiative around banning assault weapons. With The Brady Act recently expired, this new shooting may once again catalyze enough of a collective disgust response to begin a campaign intent upon roping in the ridiculous weapons readily sold to human would-be monsters. This isn't about your Daddy's pistol.
Thank you. I was following my mother's advice about 'if you can't say anything nice, shut up' - and didn't know how to counter some of this nonsense. Belief systems always made me crazy anyway - everybody invents their own god, then tries to get other people to adopt it... karma is revenge - but sometimes it is sweet indeed (at least for a couple moments). Good thing we get over it quickly.
This gal makes her life work with her personal belief system, but it gets old here on CD, especially year-after-year-after-year. I don't know if she is defensive, or looking for new converts... but it is irritating, although often she has very good comments, most of the time. I doubt if she'll take your advice about counseling - she bit my head off once before - touchy-touchy.
Sioux Rose has wisdom that is often indespensable on this site. None of us seem to be in any position to claim total understanding of the big truth about laws like Karma, we can each of us only do our best and be kind guides to each other.
All of these comments are ludicrous. How can the killing of those people in Arizona be dumped on Sarah Palin? The killer was a left-wing nutcase. Palin is certainly not "right-wing" and probably belongs to a class of politicians who support the "status-quo" (business as usual). I really cannot stand how innocent and responsible owners of firearms are being lumped into the sewage of aberrant behavior perpetrated by mentally deranged persons.
Think before you spew out garbage. Since there is no correlation between the twit that shot those people in Arizona and the mayhem that we have inflicted on persons who had a right to live in Iraq and Afghanistan, the subject of Iraq and Afghanistan should never be coupled with what that man did in Arizona.
Yeah, Palin has absolutely nothing to do with the right wing. That her rhetoric is prototypical right-wing rhetoric has no relevance. Also, Loughner's "thoughts" (on youtube) are the prototypical anti-government conspiracist bullshit, which seems pretty fucking close to the Tea Party crap to me. But feel free to believe whatever you want, reality doesn't exist, it's all in your mind. If you just wish hard enough, you can change it - the thing that the people who only exist in your mind (everyone else except you) call reality.
Loughner could not have cared less about Iraq and Afghanistan. He certainly, as a left-winger, could not have cared less about Sarah Palin. Somebody rang his bell from the "LEFT".
What the fuck are you talking about? The guy was a typical conspiracy nut. He read all the (mostly easy) stuff he could find, from Ayn Rand to Hitler to the Communist Manifesto. No idea why Palin wouldn't fit into this. But anyway, less important people get blamed for much less than what the moronette does, and of course this *is* the level of political discussion that America practices, so yeah, there's nothing wrong with blaming Palin beyond the whole political system (including the "free press") being totally worthless and fucked up.
I find it telling that you bring Sarah Palin up for comment here. I just listened to her apology/exlanation regarding the shooting and the question that was immediately put before us all. Is violent or violence hinting a tool for political or other debate? Does the use of such violence or hints of violence contribute to, in any way, however small, when individuals act on such hints or suggestions or outright directions do the hinters bear their share of blame for that outcome? If this individual was to say I did it because I believed Sarah Palins map hinted I should, would we all go.....oh she bears no blame, that is just free speech?
Is it only sticks and stones that break bones, or is it people who wisper or shout that we should or might use them to?
What I do not understand is that if Loughner was self-avowed left-wing, why in God's green earth would he listen to Sarah Palin? This pig does not fly.
My sentiments as well.
Alexander Cockburn at Counterpunch lays out all the facts on this kid and he was a gold bug and a fierce gold backed currency advocate. That's right wing all the way.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn01102011.html
Cockburn didn't say that Loughner's mother is jewish and goes to the same synagogue as Giffords. As an experiment, I googled "loughner jewish" yesterday. For at least an hour, the hit count was stuck at exactly 250,000. WTF? Did google but a cork on this embarrassment? I just checked now and it's at 255,000. Such round numbers stink to high heaven.
There is immense pressure out there to avoid labelling the kid as a jewish terrorist. Just because he has mental problems doesn't mean he did not commit an act of terrorism. If he or his family had been Muslim, the media would be screaming it from the rafters. Why aren't suicide bombers psychanalized by every tom, dick and harry as well? Only Ay-rabs can rationally commit terrorism, it seems. When a Jew does it, it's because he is insane, according to our mindf_ck media.
Loughner may be an atheist, but he is ethnically Jewish.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Yeah, I smelled a rat when it was reported that he complained about bibles being issued, and that it wasn't his faith... that he had no faith... doesn't leave a lot of options here... but something set him off (and I'm assuming he's schizophrenic).
What I do not understand is that if Loughner was self-avowed left-wing, why in God's green earth would he listen to Sarah Palin? This pig does not fly.
AND I AM NOT A GREAT FAN OF SARAH PALIN, but dumping the blame on her is not fair.
Pretty humorous. Keep it up.
I think he got his orders directly from Moscow. That is what I heard.
he was a real self-avowed sort of guy. And all leftie and stuff.
Most left-wingers are gun freaks, yeah.
Hitler was a leftist right?
And that thar Marx. I mean, it's not like it's required reading in philosophy majors on college campuses throughout the US or anything. Stalin followed Marx to the letter you know.
No, I'm not implying that the murderer was a philosophy student. He probably picked up Marx to read, because he wanted to amplify his hate of them thar socialists that all of the right-wingers love to hate, ironic as that is to say. (never mind, you won't get the irony)
Pigs can't fly, nor can they write coherent posts. My apologies to pigs.
Yeah, I don't think and it's been a general consensus that he in no way was motivated by Sarah Palin. The jury is out and she should be considered innocent to have any connection for this act, and ultimately the large portion of blame lies with the gunman and no one else. That in no way means we are all blameless. How we are to all to be blamed in whatever minute way is a very tricky thing to decide if indeed it is the case. Perhaps as tricky as knowing where the water in rain drops originated from that fill the waterways on our earth, depending on the case of violence ofcourse and this one seems pretty tricky so far.
But I feel like the chickens have come home to roost in regards to Sarah Palins choice to use a bulls eye target map to define her political agenda, she may be innocent in the case of Loughner but she is not innocent for putting up that map, just like Laughner she must own the largest portion of blame for that bad move politically speaking. It happens.
Assume one had a child and from birth the parents warned the child about "some bad BLACK people that might seek to harm him"
At 10 years old after being repeatedly told that there SOME black people that might seek to harm said child, the parent starts to show the child how to use a gun. The parent tells the child "this is in case one of those BLACK people seek to do you harm or come and take away all your toys or come to take away the house we live in you will have to kill him"
How would that child feel about "Black people" when he grew up? Is this simply an issue of "free speech" that is harmless?
One can certainly argue that "well the facts show there ARE rapists and murderers that are black" but that hardly means teaching the child in such a manner is justified.
Very much the same happens in an Enviroment that attacks "Liberals, Leftists, Rightists, Homosexuals, Muslims, Jews , Abroiginals or Government Officials" in such a manner.
It a very different kettle of fish when one critiques another groups positions or refuses to accept that groups beliefs of ones own and tries to change that position via debate and dialogue then when one couples violent imagery and the suggestion of violence against the other.
Now I do not suggest we all ban "free speech" but we have to accept, there ARE consequences and people should accept responsibilty for their words.
When the threat of violence becomes accepted into the dialogue the use of violence will become accepted in the society.
Words do have meaning. They DO shape personalities and behaviour.
Exactly right!
This kid wasn't just a lone nut. His world view was shaped by his environment. There's a war out there on the internet trying to bury the fact that his mom goes to the same synagogue as Giffords. The kid was pissed at Giffords since 2007. The kid was part of a reform jewish community of 140 familes which included Congressional Representative Gabby Giffords.
We are seeing the REAL third rail in political discourse in this hypocrite filled country. They are AFRAID of losing their jobs in media if they talk about the kid's background and upringing.
They go on and on about violent rhetoric being a cancer and the need for mental health services. Yes, they are valid issues but bringing them up now smacks of agenda driven opportunism.
Why has no one mentioned the inconvenient as hell fact that Loughner's parents have the financial means to have had their kid treated by a shrink? Because it doesn't fit someone's agenda.
At least the gay African-American/latino Hernandez who disarmed Loughner when he was trying to reload has been given SOME (not enough) recognition. What he did literally destroys all the bullshit white racist crap about how gays, blacks and latinos respond in stressfull situations. This John Wayne HERO is GAY, BLACK and LATINO. It sure puts a kink in the lazy, cowardly stereotype white racists like to push when defining minority groups. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, all you mightymites out there.
Couldn't control yourself, could you?
"Think before you spew out garbage."
Ahem. Physician, heal thyself!
Check his website.
Interesting. Some are taking the line that nothing Beck or Plain or anyone has said could have influenced the guy in any way, but you are saying that some (unknown) leftist "rang his bell" and got him to do something.
Maybe Palin is a leftist - is that your contention? She did "target" the victim, and here you are saying that something like that could have influenced someone else. Or something.
We can watch this unfold. If it seems that he "is" a right winger, we will hear "nothing anyone said could have possibly influenced him." If it can be made to seem that he is a left winger, then we will hear "those lefties with their hate speech drove him to do this!"
Of course we will. Haven't we watched this reel a few hundred times now? Do we have to keep pretending that we don't know it by heart?
According to the FBI.gov website, over 15,000 'merkans are murdered every year by other 'merkans.
We turn on the TV and we see constant violence, even in cartoons. The History Channel is basically the glorification of war and violence channel. Now there is a Military Channel.
Children are brainwashed with the glorification of violence from day one.
We see the video games of all sorts that are super-violent. The best selling video game of all time is a military-themed ultra-violent game.
The film industry is the same, filled with gratuitous violence and even making violence humorous, funny - thus further de-sensitizing viewers.
Couple this with the historical culture of violence: killing Native Americans to ethnically cleanse the land for whites. Starting wars for profit etc.
Guns and gun culture are so intertwined with our society and have been since the very beginning, it would be very difficult to limit guns in this country.
There are so many guns already in circulation, even if there were a total ban on all firearms, it would do very little to mitigate gun violence.
SOCIALIST: Did you mean to leave out football, practically a religion in this "slaughter the weak" oriented country? Hey, not only do all the army ads come on during major telecasts of football games... the way I see it, football is the appetizer for the main entree being served: war! The segue from one to the other is quite clear for any with eyes to see. (And while I have no link or direct quote on hand, I am HARDLY the first writer to have articulated the connection.)
SR: I don't watch or follow "American football" so I forgot to mention that. I agree, that is indeed another tool for promoting steroid-freak macho paramilitary violent culture as well. Even the commercials, as you point out, are military in nature, or alcohol. That's a great message; drink lots of alcohol, watch lots of football and join the military! Also the mega-size V-8 American pick-up trucks are promoted as well, with an arficially low baritone wannabe tough-guy voice-over. Built Ford Tough! Yeah, you can be a tough-guy. Drink lotsa Budweiser, buy a huge Ford truck...
If it wasn't so tragic, it would be hillarious.
"We are not going to dismantle all the weapons of war and melt down the multitude of guns any time soon. Conflicts of all sorts will be with us as long as we draw breath, both individually and civilizationally speaking......
"Others before us have faced similar dilemmas. Now, with the virtue of clarity inspired by tragedy, we have a unique opportunity to embrace another vision. We can and must make this a great turning, away from a culture forever reacting to self-inflicted wounds and toward one that grows stronger and mature with each passing challenge. It will be the greatest test ever faced by humankind....." Randall Amster
I have great respect for anyone engaged in Peace Studies, and greatly admire the works of Thomas Merton. Please excuse my version of clarity inspired by tragedy, but what just happened in Tuscon, Arizona is not on the traumatic learning moment scale of the assassinations of Martin Luther King or the Kennedys, Hiroshima and the Holocaust, World War I, or (for true American exceptionalists) even Gettysburg.
Damn right others before us have faced similar dilemmas - indeed, immensely greater, more graphic dilemmas. Been there before.
Contemporary political culture in the United States, at its elitist top, has regressed significantly just in my lifetime from the notion that peace advocacy is patriotic. Until some folks are willing to talk real words about dismantling and melting down weaponry, I see little to be encouraged about at this historic moment.
Bill from Saginaw
"Most of all, its my hope that those who were killed are not vengeful."
What, "vengeful" in the afterlife?
You lay out a mishmash of potential influences that you assert, should be considered BEFORE the possible influence of say, a political map with rifle crosshairs, or hate speech laced with gun shooter's lingo.
Any individual that gets up one morning, and decides to realize their bloody vision is of course insane.
An examination of what has contributed to that insanity is of course open to contemplation, and discussion.
There is one thing you leave out, and that is free will. Or is it all some sort of determinism? Surely, we are bound by certain factors that we have zero control over, and some it could be argued, are so damaged from an early age, that they in essence have much less "free will" to exercise.
I'm not a fan of violent video games, and choose not to play them. However, violent visions happen in dreams as well, where imagery comes tapped directly from the subconscious (as best we know). What would we do to ameliorate that possible influence?
I propose we start with more of a common sense approach, though normally I abhor that cliche.
Since it is a given, that some people because of their current state of insanity are capable of violence, it is therefore, not a good idea to POTENTIALLY incite violence by putting rifle crosshairs on a political map, and then augmenting such imagery with gun shooter's lingo.
Thus I believe contemplating the influence of Sarah Palin's media campaign is logical and necessary, in the broader examination of the propagation of hate mongers primarily on the right of the political spectrum. This is not news, it is a known fact, that the vast majority of influencing of public opinion in any vitriolic hateful sense, has come from THE RIGHT. Rush Limbaugh's first broadcast came the day after the fairness doctrine's demise.
We need not be "patient". It is long past due that those who design hate and deceit campaigns, designed to lead people in the ways of hate for a political advantage, are called out on decisions to do so.
I don't advocate any new laws in this regard, just like I don't believe that video games should be outlawed, or that we need to revisit a Tipper Gore led Congressional commission examining Rap lyrics. Although it would be very nice to get a medium to channel Frank Zappa. For me, a day without Frank Zappa, even a channeled one, is a day without sunshine.
Where are the video games, the song lyrics, the drugs that would lead a person to target the particular person he targeted?
We cannot know for certain what motivated this killer. We can know this: right wingers are saying "take them out" and referring to specific people, and one of those people was in fact taken out.
You say "should the facts reveal that hate speech had a role in this then we should turn our attention to radio and tv personalities."
If the facts in this particular case do not "reveal that hate speech had a role" does that mean that we should not then place our attention on the hate speech?
The facts - those that have already "come in" - fully justify the comments people have been making. Right wingers were calling for taking people out, one of those people has been shot at in the hope of taking them out. That is what people are saying. I cannot understand why others are saying that we should not do that. People are being whipped into frenzies of hatred, are being told that certain people need to be killed, one of those people they are targeting did get shot.
Why is it - as some are claiming - "too soon to say anything?" I think it is far too late, not far too early.
The most damning evidence against the right wing media hate speech mouthpieces and their apologists and defenders is their reaction to this. They are on the defensive way out of proportion to any charges that are being leveled against them. That strongly implies that they know their own murderous intent, and they know the effect they are hoping to have on others.
The weapons of war represent agglomerations of aggression, crystalizations of aggressive intent. But some individuals profit from the $1 trillion "defense" budget, others do not. Some promote war as a means of settling disputes, others seek to avert war. We hear talk of the "culture of violence." Some promote and encourage it, others merely endure it, still others resist it. "It" is a system, American capitalism, which valorizes violence, glorifies war, and its values are internalized by people unconsciously. That is deeply problematic, because we cannot talk about dismantling weapons until we can discuss what those weapons were created for, why we must spend $1 trillion for "defense" annually, and the corporate media won't let that conversation occur. So here we are, passengers stuck on a big truck, with an insane driver, on an highway to hell.
Most people are followers and look up to our leaders. If many of our leaders are violent, how can followers not be? Are the amount of violent leaders diminishing over time? In one thousand years from now, will violence be much less common? Curious to peoples thoughts on this. I have always assumed that evolution of society, at some point, will bring peace.
Ah, finally Peace on Earth. Whew!!!!
What's that huge cube up in the sky?
Oh shit.
The tinder is plentiful and it will only take a spark to ignite it into a fierce civil war. This Nation was born of death, the purposeful killing of 100,000,000 American Indians, and surely it will die of death absent some devastating intervention. The American culture is a "death" culture and death is to be expected. Civil war is far more probable than developing a culture of life in America.
First, it is disrespectful to wrongly refer to someone as "agent." I would request that you cease to do so.
Second, the most recent information available regarding Indigenous deaths is one hundred million. It can be found in the following two books:
1491 by Charles Mann
http://www.amazon.com/1491-Revelations-Americas-Before-Columbus/dp/1400032059/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1294867281&sr=8-1#reader_1400032059
American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World by David Stannerd
http://www.amazon.com/American-Holocaust-Conquest-New-World/dp/0195085574/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1
Both are well worth reading.
Actually I think he got you on this one. American Indians would be those residing in North, South and Central America, would it not?
When you talk about American Indians, I think you can include those from South and Central America. Same way I talk about the European bastards who came and slaughtered them. No self-respecting Brit would call himself a Spaniard but they're all European bastards in my book.
I question your numbers by an order of magnitude.
It's like living a Tolkien nightmare. The forces of Mordor are afoot and one could cut the greed with a knife. In this version of the story, Frodo Baggins gets crushed like a bug. My overarching fear at this point is that not only will this country burst into flames, it will take the whole world with it.
Media, in all its forms, is the main influencer of public consciousness. Compare the music, news, opinion, movies, etc. pre 1985 or so to today’s versions and you can see how things have changed. Take music, for example. Many of the popular songs in the 60’s and 70’s spoke to social consciousness. From Bob Dylan to Marvin Gaye to Stevie Wonder to the Clash and on and on. These songs and their messages were in the background informing and inspiring. Music of this sort would never be allowed to become popular today. Instead they pushed rap, which mostly consisted of violence and sexism. The publics’ imagination is engineered against itself. We’re steered away from what would make us truly happy, such as a healthy planet, peace, and brother/sisterhood, to, instead, what keeps the profiteers happy. The media does everything they possibly can to not have us come together. Peace and unity need their own PR firm.
You're right, and making very good points about popular music, but "peace and unity needing their own PR firm" is wrong (if taken literally). PR and marketing should not be part of any reasonable and rational democratic society, because they're forms of manipulation and are by their nature bad for understanding reality. They're only good for distorting it, not for knowledge. Read some Lippman or Bernays (they're available on gutenberg.org iirc) if you want to get a better picture of the thinking behind this shit. PR has as much legitimacy as the Inquisition.