A while back I decided to try using B.F. Skinner’s approach to a Paris Hilton-type political figure. My hope was that if enough reasonable people stopped feeding her attention she would wither and blow away. Unfortunately it seems by sheer numbers, there are just not enough reasonable people to balance out the wing nuts.
Today an Arizona Congresswoman was either assassinated or grievously injured while attending a public event. According to NPR, Congresswoman Giffords (D, AZ) was shot point blank in the head. Almost a dozen people were injured by the gunman (note, that’s one freedom to tote a gun lovin’ nut job) with up to 6 killed (note, dead).
So already, some folks are claiming that since she was a conservative Democrat, this mass murder must have been orchestrated by the liberal left in order to make Republicans look bad for some schizoid logic. (I am not citing that one because the thinking is so twisted that it doesn’t deserve recognition.) It is more likely that the gunman, a young man at the edge of mental unbalance was influenced by growing up during the wave of increasing vitriolic violent public discourse and societal paranoia that has marred the last ten years of our country’s political machinations. An example is this graphic from the website for the only political action committee authorized by the ex-governor of Alaska. This has recently been scrubbed from the political action committee site but has made the rounds through the fourth estate and blogosphere for nearly a year.
The United States as a Legitimate Shooting Range Target
Now you may think this is kind of iffy. After all, the late congresswoman’s name or image does not appear in this graphic. There is nothing in this particular graphic to suggest a connection with any organization. Well, here is the full version of the poster.
Named and signed. Warrant for Death Squads?
Note, this poster was designed to illustrate people targeted because they voted for health insurance reform. You know, that little effort to support connecting people with medical coverage. Because we want our citizens to live healthier and more productive lives.
That is, unless you are on the list of She Who Still Will Not Be Named.
Consult your parents.
I realize now at age 47 why things seemed so weird when I was, oh, 5-11. That would be, 1968-1974. Because the world was much as it is now.
Anger, fear, ignorance, all creating a palpable soup that MY sensitivities pick up on.
When you’re the former governor of Alaska, you don’t read, and you’re riding the wave of fear and intolerance, a website like this is just “cute,” and people who take it seriously “need to get a life.” Easy for her to say. She’s too stupid to realize that any time you ride the wave of fear and hatred, you bring bad things to the surface.
This is going to continue, hon. Only blessing I have is the hope that, like my mother, I will be dead at 59. That way, this cycle, which will pass before I’m gone, won’t repeat itself for a third time in my lifetime.
Last time, it was racial/economic intolerance.
This time, it still is.
To these people, I say, because I’m right and they can save a lot of us a lot of heartache if they heed the message:
He’s black. Get over it.
By: BillfromChappaqua on January 9, 2011
at 8:31 am
Referring you to NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=132778190)
“The attack on Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and those who were with her might be the work of “a single nut,” said Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva, whose Arizona district shares Tucson with Giffords’ district. But he said the nation must assess the fallout of “an atmosphere where the political discourse is about hate, anger and bitterness.”"
Note the comment by the local sheriff
“In Pima County, Ariz., Sheriff Clarence Dupnik suggested “all this vitriol” in recent discourse might be connected to Saturday’s shootings. “This may be free speech,” he told reporters, “but it’s not without consequences.”"
Free speech with a semi-automatic?
By: zhak39 on January 9, 2011
at 9:36 am
This unfortunate incident could be the result of politics, or maybe the neighbors dog told him to do it. We may never know. If you take a look at the shooters mug shot, you know that the synapses aren’t connecting.
Instead of focusing on whether or not rhetoric is the cause, maybe we should be asking why a Glock with a thirty round clip is so readily available to the public.
By: crabby appleton on January 11, 2011
at 4:46 pm
Crabby,
There are many aspects of this incident that should cause warning bells to clamor for all of us. Undiagnosed and untreated mental unbalance is high up on the list. Certain mental illnesses ‘kick in’ at or around 18–when individuals have the least likelihood of having a safety net to recognize, pay for and structure a route into healing service. The most strident and sensational voices have become commonplace, mundane, offering messages of violence, hatred, bitterness, dismissiveness, disrespect and so much of it is done with hard ironic sarcastic tones.
This is not my world. I live in a rather bright world with love and service and compassion and caring, valuing not just economic viability but friendship and community and neighborliness.
But for many? What a lonely, bitter life, awash in negativity and hype and yes, with easy access to semi-automatic weapons. I am not saying that rhetoric is the cause. It is an ingredient along with the societal state of anxiety, the sensationalistic melodramatization of hype, the acidity of the messages. The rhetoric is a large part of this septic stew.
By: zhak39 on January 11, 2011
at 5:20 pm
I would add a few things to Zhak’s, relative to Crabby’s.
First, I don’t want to lose sight of the fact this kid was a mess. And frankly, I don’t particularly care why. We can all accept he was a few spices shy of a fajita plate.
Second, I don’t live in Zhak’s world. The world of my consciousness said, “Every time you have a leader that preaches love, fairness and tolerance, you get the short end.” So I find it insultingly precious when I hear folks talk about how someone so filled with hatred was just a “nut.”
Third, I don’t live in Crabby’s world where there apparently is never a connection between what is happening in the world around us that capsulizes itself in a single incident. If Crabby’s world view were true, why, there would have been no reason to kill President Lincoln, as the end of slavery may have resulted in a temporary change of economic affairs, but would have balanced itself out in the long run; there would have been no reason to kill President Kennedy, as the pressure on organized crime may have resulted in a change of economic affairs, but organied crime would have adjusted; there would not have been no reason to kill Martin Luther Kint Jr., because subgegation of minorities would have proven itself to be a temporary economic benefit, but a draw in the long run; that there would have been no reason to kill RFK, other than retribution, because economic affairs were already changing for the underground, to its benefit.
Again, the situation in which we find are a far cry from real action, and real change. Rather, it is an excuse to continue the status quo and to strengthen the barriers to change.
Meanwhile, the lives with which you are making this economic and social balancing test?
Well, the question is answered: they are not real people; their lives and egos and emotions and psyches don’t matter. Instead, they are raw economic statistics. If you get it wrong, the shareholdres will let you know.
Crabby, is there anything I left out of your economic analysis, brought forward to detail how it works when it plays out?
By: BillfromChappaqua on January 13, 2011
at 12:43 am
Come to my world. The water is fine, jump in.
Bill, I am in accord with much that you say although I wouldn’t cram all that in to poor Crabby’s mouth. He has never presented himself as so unreasoned.
You do point out why this group that is being fronted by a former beauty queen, failed student, bitter former journalist, self-destructed civil servant, ironic hard edged sarcastic discompassionate spokesperson is so dangerous.
In the last book written for her, the Chicago School of Economics was heavily cited. This is problematic for me. The Chicago School would like you to believe that all that you outlined, the natural balance of economic factors in pristine capitalism have exactly the effect that you describe. After all, they believe the market to be reasonable and rational. In fact, with our memories so fleeting, (individuals die or get old and no one listens to them) history can be tweeked if not revised. History is written by the victors.
The foundational concern with the Chicago School is that the only things that are valued are those where money is exchanged. That .59 can of carrots has great value (not nutritional but) from seed and pesticide company to the poorly paid field worker, to the tin knocker that made the can to the processor that stripped and boiled the taste out of it to the transporter (auto company, driver, fuel company) to the consumer fetching it in an SUV to the shelf stocker to the cashier. The carrot I pluck out of my garden and share with my bright eyed vegetarian daughter? Valueless.
Along the same lines–my choice to raise my children personally rather than put them in daycare? Loss of discretionary income from choosing not to work outside of the home, loss of generation of jobs for daycare teachers. Childrearing has no value.
The greatest danger lies in linking this theory of economic value to social decision making. If raising children personally has no economic value, supporting those who make that choice becomes a social detriment. Bad American, welfare mom, no nutritional programs for slackers that don’t get their asses in the factories to generate income up the line. Social programs for people with late onset schizophrenia? Nope, doesn’t add up on the ledger sheet. Costs more than it generates. They’re lone nuts anyway. A bean shy of a fajita. Dismissable. After all, who cares?
Again, that’s not my world and the people who are pushing to make our country into that model do not represent me. Their messages are reprehensible and through vitriolic rhetoric they are pushing an agenda that some are falling for but I do not accept.
By: zhak39 on January 13, 2011
at 8:40 am
Thanks, kid.
You made me smile today.
By: BillfromChappaqua on January 13, 2011
at 8:47 am
“Crabby, is there anything I left out of your economic analysis, brought forward to detail how it works when it plays out?”
Wow.
I don’t recall making any economic analysis in my original two paragraph response.
Go back and read it again, there is nothing between the lines.
By: crabby appleton on January 14, 2011
at 12:08 pm
You’re right, Crabby. He was putting words in your mouth to make a point and won’t do it again. If he does I will not publish the comment. My apologies.
By: zhak39 on January 16, 2011
at 12:27 pm
My apologies too.
Does that mean I can’t join Zhak in the pool though?
By: BillfromChappaqua on January 21, 2011
at 12:00 am
Thank you Bill.
And the pool is open. Just remember to bring your Captain America speedo.
By: zhak39 on January 21, 2011
at 8:21 am