One's interpretation of what happened in Tucson yesterday is essentially a psychological Rorschach test. If you need to see a broader political significance to the acts of a troubled young man with typically easy access to rapid-firing weaponry, then you can find it. You can look at Sarah Palin's "bullseye" chart, note that Gabby Giffords is on the map, and conclude that Sarah Palin incited an impressionable psychopath to act out. In this way you can use the horrific event as another means of conducting a political argument.
Firing handguns at politicians from point blank range is not anything new in American history. The American John Wilkes Booth and the Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan did the same thing. Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray and Byron de la Beckwith operated from farther away. John Hinckley fired from medium range.
America's a shooting gallery. The University of Texas, Columbine, Virginia Tech, post offices, workplaces, disgruntled ex-employees, enraged and estranged husbands, the D.C. sniper. A certain irreducible percentage of the population is mentally deranged, paranoid schizophrenic, violently predisposed, and any of these nut cases can get guns. The respectable, overwhelming majority of the populace supports their Second Amendment right to arm up. Justice Antonin Scalia, who likes to shoot caged birds, has confirmed that the Second Amendment is an individual right, not just a collective right belonging to official "militias."
The political discourse in this country, especially on the Right, has gotten completely gross, it does incite to violence, it's unhinged, but logically speaking, it acts in exacerbation of a preexisting tendency among that irreducible small cohort of lunatics to fire away. People who place bulleyes on national maps next to the names of politicians who need to be "taken out" ought to be ashamed of themselves, but there is no shame left in this country, and after a brief period of fake penitence, the yahoos will again be out in force.
You write "A certain irreducible percentage of the population is mentally deranged, paranoid schizophrenic, violently predisposed, and any of these nut cases can get guns." Legal or not, I'm not sure that would change. For non-nut cases, I feel comfortable that both my wife and daughters have guns, and keep them loaded and accessible.
ReplyDeleteThe right wing cannot survive without hate. They have nothing else to convince the masses to vote against their own interests and elect right-wingers. The masses must be made to hate Commies, Irishmen, Big Government, Jews, etc. so that they can be sold right-wing fantasies such as "trickle-down" or "the invisible hand of the marketplace". Ignorant, ill-educated citizens who would not otherwise vote are roused to go to the polls only by strong emotions. Hate fills the bill perfectly.
ReplyDeleteAs a Christian conservative, I respect government and the need for government to provide a level of social stability, but I want limited government. I see too much power focused in one place as a danger because I believe we humans all have sinful natures, and focusing too much power in the hands of a few of us is unwise. The danger of too much power in government is clear, evidenced over and over again in history -- Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, etc etc. And guess what? All of these men were what we are -- fallen, sinful human beings. Do I somehow think that a powerful government in the hands of "our people" would somehow be different. I wouldn't count on it. The Republican party is comprised of people, the Democratic Party is comprised of people, the Tea Party is comprised of people; and , as one person said, no combination of rotten eggs will make a good omelet. Peace and tranquility on earth, the time when "swords will be beaten into plowshares and the lion will lay down with the lamb" only will result when the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ, returns to this earth. It never will happen through the godless efforts of we humans.
ReplyDeleteHammerud may respect government, but he clearly does not respect democracy. He says Do I somehow think that a powerful government in the hands of "our people" would somehow be different. I wouldn't count on it. Spoken like a true fascist.
ReplyDelete