This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Turning Insanity Into Politics
COMMENTARY
This article originally appeared in The Daily Capitalist.
Like most of us I was shocked by the murders in Tucson and I hope for a speedy recovery for Gabrielle Giffords.
When our politicians are targeted it disturbs our sense of security and we question what kind of a society we are. That's only natural. Next to 911, the most shocking public event in my life was the assassination of John Kennedy. Like 911 the memories are vivid.
But, not every insane act by a "lone wolf" is a political event. A tragedy to be sure, but in this case even if Jared Lee Loughner thought he was making a political statement, it is not a political event. It is an insane event. All you need to do is check out Mr. Loughner's Youtube postings.
If had he been slightly insane and believed that violence would achieve a defined political end for a known political movement, then it would have been political. I would put most terrorist bombers in this category. I mean Unabomber Ted Kaczynski had political ends and was a terrorist, but could you say it was a political act? No. It was an insane act.
Yet the topic of the day on the media has been "What does this say about politics in America?" "Yes, yes, we know the guy was insane but what about the politics of hate." "What about hate mongering on talk radio?" Generally the words "Tea Party" usually came up. In almost all comments on radio and TV the folks that I would say were on the left were the ones raising these issues.
In other countries there are defined movements that use terrorism to achieve political goals. It seems to be a way of life in Iraq, Pakistan, and some other Muslim countries. Even in Europe, the Basque separatists, ETA, and the Irish Republican Army in Northern Ireland have used political assassination for years. You could say that anyone who would assassinate a politician had to be "crazy" but that is not always the case in cultures of violence.
In the U.S. (correct me if I'm wrong) all of the political murders have been committed by insane persons. Conspiracy theorists can argue the point, but I don't buy into those ideas. Conspiracies have a way of unwinding and so far no great conspiracies have been uncovered behind Lee Harvey Oswald, James Early Ray, and Sirhan Sirhan. All of these men had political ends, but not even Malcolm X's murderers, arguably acting with political motives, have been tied to a secret underground political movement. You would say they were deranged.
Tom Ashcroft on NPR Monday morning asked the question first off in his pandering manner: "What does this say about politics in America?" Well, Tom, I'll tell you: it means nothing. In fact Tom, compared to the 1960s, the level of "political" violence has gone way, way down in this country.
In a few short years of the 60s we had the murders of John Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Bobby Kennedy, and Malcolm X. We had the Watts Riots sung to the tune of Barry McGuire's "Eve of Destruction." We had a nasty war in Vietnam that gave rise to large protests and riots on campuses across the country as the military draft was taking 50,000 men per month. We had violence from the Civil Rights movements as "agitators" were murdered (James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner) and beaten. Not to mention the Birmingham bombings of little girls. I recall the Black Panther shootout in Oakland quite vividly. The Cuban Missile Crisis and The Bomb was the backdrop.
I would say that despite the complaints by talking heads, the level of political discourse in America has gotten better, not worse. And, dear reader, I would say that the discourse on the blogosphere has done much to raise it. Every medium is a mixed bag but blogs rise above the 30 second sound bite.
Assassinations, murder, and violence are a part of every society, including ours. But don't confuse insanity with politics.
»
- advertisements -
Its very likely that the guy never even heard of Sarah Palin. Sure. But the event did not stop her from taking down the crosshairs from her website targeting certain congressional districts (you see, she is laying the foundation for 2012 in a positive manner) and the "reload" statement from her Twitter, just in case, you see. She is a nut on a much larger scale.
Tuscon is an insane area of the country in general where politicians try to out do themselves as far as their own "caliber" of firearms advocacy. Even the Congresswomen herself was caught up in this. Microcosim: Just as if you gave a speech on the floor of the Senate and stated that spending a trillion dollars a year on defense is ruining the country, Tuscon politicians would never be caught advocating any level of gun restriction. It would be political suicide.
I do believe in the second ammendment, but must we allow the gun lobby (a couple hundred wanks) to profit from selling Uzi automatic weapons to citizens ? Or, how about at least if you want one of those, you have to get a special permit. Now that idea won't get you elected in AZ, ...
File in the "move to Canada" folder... (or simply carry a loaded Uzi with you at all times in certain states..or better, don't go to those states)
"I do believe in the second ammendment,..."
I'm callin you a liar...I don't see how you can when you follow along with this;
"but must we allow the gun lobby (a couple hundred wanks) to profit from selling Uzi automatic weapons to citizens ?"
The "gun lobby" is a PAC...you're not only a liar you're an idiot.
"Or, how about at least if you want one of those, you have to get a special permit."
You already have to.
Yes, to all who say the left is just as bad as the right as far as real violence:
Look at the list from the 1960s. All the people assassinated were on the political left. Not only leaders but activists. Hundreds of them, people working on the civil rights issue, which is absoluelty in the political realm. they were massacred.
The government massacred them at Kent State. Citizens being killed by government action.
Sure, Ford got shot and Reagan was shot by a mad man. But the political activists on the right at the time were not targeted around any issue. The right wing is far more violent and has been for quite some time.
Thats why it was so disappointing to me to see the rise of Sarah Palin and all the radical right wing groups that support her. They are violent.
Sure, we could talk about how we need better mental health care in this nation, and that we need sensible gun control to keep automatic weapons out of the hands of people who show signs of insanity. But the right wing will not talk about either of these issues in a reasonable way. They demagog these issues, scaring people that reasonable gun laws mean the "government is comin' fur yur guns, people!"
And we cant talk reasonably with the right wing about expanding or improving mental health care, because, good god- did you see the demonization of improving regular heath care? The death panels? Health care is going to kill granny! No, the right wing will never address these issues in a serious or responsible way. Never.
Jared is a schizophrenic, plain and simple. No doubt about that.
And if you do have any doubts, just read the accounts of his behavior during the past few years. Heck, there are even online message board posts he made this summer at a conspiracy theorists website... even *they* thought he was bonkers at the time.
However, Jared's was a political act, at least to some degree. But it wasn't a left versus right thing.
He just didn't like the government. He was scared of them. He wanted them gone. If anything, he's an anarchist.
Gabby, a Democrat, just happened to be his local Congresswoman. Wouldn't have mattered if she were left, right or center. Could have been anybody in that office at that time. Odds are, it would have been a similar outcome.
Again, it's a bit of a political thing. But more than anything, it's a mental health thing. Apparently he had even been making death threats against non-politicans the past year or so. If his target hadn't been a politician, it eventually would have been a teacher, a classroom, a media personality, a cop, whatever. Something or somebody else would have been his festering obsession.
If anything, hopefully more light will be shed on the mental health issue of our country. That's where the focus should be.
Thank you Econophile.
Dupnick's assumption that he can and should speak for Arizona shows the ignorance and arrogance of many of our "leaders".
Dupnick is an elected official but look behind him in the interviews; his name is plastered to the wall in big large letters as though it were HIS Sherrif's department.
Obviously someone who has been in "office" too long and not much different than a majority of our career politicians.
You are Public Servants, not Public Savants!
This kid is a nutjob; and the attempted line drawing and conjecture show the sad state of what passes as "journalism" in name only.
Sorry, but the politicians make the dichotomy impossible to see! :(
Politics and killing do go hand in hand. Look at almost any War. A crazy person who had a background check to buy a hi-cap, after being crazy on campus to the extent one of the professors talked to the campus police to do something, and was arrested many times with no charges filed, may also be political. Why were the arrests dismissed without charges and appropriate trials? Is his mother a council woman? The guy was acting out, but the police said they couldn’t do anything till he did something. Political correctness??
Kennedy and Ronald Reagan started the process to let crazies run loose. We have more and more. Funding is reduced and laws dictate that we have people on the street talking to walls and are a danger to themselves and others. They are sleeping under bridges and freezing to death in severe winters. Yes, maybe they don’t take their meds. Maybe they would rather drink the help out money than get a room. Maybe they come from a family that keeps them housed and then they shoot a politician.
That is one thing. But, this guy was KNOWN and PORTECTED. NO way in Hell he should have passed the background. There needs to be more than one trail.
To take someone right to buy a gun is the problem here. You have to go to court and prove they are a danger to society or themselves. We dont have the money to do that very often in Arizona. This guy fell through all the cracks. But considering serious mental illness like this is MOST likely to show in the early 20's. Maybe we could craft a law that someone of this age who has exhibited psychological problems in school (like the Virginia tech shooter) or in public should have to earn that right back by going through treatment. There has to be a way.
One woman in his class at college wrote her friend the first day in class:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345700/Arizona-shooting-Jared-L...
Au contrair, this act by a recognized deranged induhvidual barely qualifies as pre-meditated. Our boy had many runins and conflicts with authority, so his decision to act out his frustration is the culmination of long-running issues. He picked the politician on the spur of the moment, because he had met her, remembered the open format of the public meeting, figured that would be easy to 'hit', and she is an important person (at least according to the lamestream media, the only kind he watches). He obviously is too confused to have any meaningful political views. Again, the lamestream media would like to make it somehow political, otherwise it seems to legitimize that political targets are fair game, an issue the political class, and their poodle media synchophants, would definitely like to de-emphasize. Actually, Ms Giffords has the same human value as every other human on the planet, and the loss is measured in pain and suffering the same way. If anything 'political' can be interpreted from this violence, it is that the political class, with the help and encouragement of the media, has made themselves into desirable targets for such insane weirdos, by presenting themselves as being somehow larger than normal humans.
Politicians being targeted does not disturb my sense of security, not in the least.
Suggesting that the pre-meditated (by one person ... or more than one) assassination of a federal judge and an elected politician doesn't involve politics is quite a bit beyond stupid.
Pile onto that the author's goofy "lone nutter" fairy tales and you soon realize that, not surprisingly, the Daily Capitalist is full of shit.
Well said rshannon. I look to zerohedge for insightful trading and speculation insight, but i am somewhat taken aback by the level of paranoia in some of these posts.
We are the govt. "We the people" do indeed elect our representatives in this country. And "united we stand, divided we fall" is as true now as it ever was. "E pluribus unum". From many, one.
The fastest way for this country to go nowhere, is to keep up this level of vitriol in the discussions of the major issues facing this country. China, a socialist/communist country is cleaning our clock. We seem to be perpetually distracted by the red herrings in our politics.
Some people on these threads lack humanity. I like the Libertarians but I do not think they criticize the corporate state in a meaningful way like the left wing does.
They need to add that to their field of study. The false meme that the media itself is 'liberal' (in order to make the radical right wing look less radical by comparison) has really hurt this nation, too.
The question is not whether this shooter was influenced by Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, etc. The question is whether it's responsible behavior for leaders and media figures (of any persuasion) to exhort their audiences to "reload, take aim, exercise 2nd Amendment rights [etc.]" vis-a-vis specific people, or groups. The question is whether it was responsible behavior for Giffords' last opponent to sponser a campaign event titled "Take Her Down" at which the main advertised entertainment was opportunity to shoot an M16. [Does anybody seriously contend that's not an appallingly reckless thing to do?] I submit doing these things is irresponsible, dangerous and reckless, firstly because SOME unstable people WILL be influenced. We can argue forever whether this shooter is or isn't the product of his culture, but how much blood will it take before we all acknowledge it's wrong, regardless?
Yes, even such reckless and irresponsible expression is generally protected from prior governmental restraint by the 1st Amendment -- free speech rights to which I give staunch, absolute support. But that doesn't mean it's not appallingly irresponsible, reckless and dangerous behavior that should be opposed and condemned, especially when it comes from our side of whichever fence.
Perhaps even more important is that such inflamatory language enrages many people to such an extent that they are unable to give serious consideration to substantive policy issues, and fair attention to opposing viewpoints.
It's sad it takes such a horrific tragedy to bring these issues into focus, but this is a discussion we need to have if we're to discourage self-serving demagogues from influencing unstable people and inflaming millions of others to such an extent that rational, open mindered consideration of real issues is impossible, and without which democracy will not survive.
My three cents.
So you agree with free speech as long as it doesn't offend anyone or "drive" them to violence?
If you were capable of thought, you would realize how ignorant that statement is.
Show me one case of someone you think is on the 'left' actually inciting violence like Sharon Angle or Sarah Palin.
Your entire post was unbalanced.
Nothing was said of Pelosi, Barry, Clyburn, Kerry, Olberman, Maddow, Kos, Sharpton et al exhorting violence from the left?
Look in the mirror.
Example?
"Example?"
King Barry's own words...perhaps you missed it...but I don't think so...more likely you ignored it...critical thinking might make your head explode.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/turning-insanity-politics#comment-868811
That's because it only happens in your fevered, wet dreams.
You got nuthin punk...go back to Kos.
nmewn,
Bingo!............
Baloney. Our current day political rhetoric is much more civil than most of the the 1800's (look it up) politics and we didn't have morons going to public places and shooting everyone in site. In fact, isn't politics often referred to as war without the guns or some similar thing?
What about some personal responsibility? Has inflammatory language ever made you want to grab a gun and go shoot as many people as possible? Hogwash psycho-babble.
Additionally, this ass clown doesn't appear to have been influenced by anyone of either/any political stripe, despite what the highly esteemed Krugman may think. See this link below for postings from this guy (alleged, but likely) :
http://abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread649091/pg1
He was a deranged, likely drugged, incoherent fool that for some reason decided to kill a bunch of people - because he could, not because some politician or commentator said something to tweak his delicate sensibilities.
Scary as hell, but that's the way it is sometimes.
Have a nice day.
But the method of communications is much better and more wide spread. In the old days, you had to write a letter. Or have a phamplet printed. Not everyone could read. Words traveled much more slowly. No, the rhetoric has been way over the top here for the types of weapons we have available. When Obama opened up the National Parks to gun carry, I knew there would be a shooting tragedy within 6 months. There was.
The Establishment and Mainstream Media is losing control of the PEOPLE and as a result vehemently ATTACKING ALTERNATIVE NEWS. Suddenly, anyone that does not agree with the Socialist policies of the Obama Administration is an ENEMY OF THE STATE!
Watch the video “The Establishment is Losing Control” at (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JIDs7Luwxg).
Anonymous-
“We do not have much time left before the FREEDOM of Americans is robbed by our leaders, the Internet Censored, Guns confiscated and the PEOPLE jailed for speaking truth!”
"We have huge numbers of radical right wing groups here-the white supremacists, KKK, the Minutemen, anti immigration groups, the radical gun rights people, the Christianists and the right to life people (who have some blood on their hands already from assassination of doctors). The Minutemen already killed a child in a border home invasion last year" Shano,you seem to like painting with a broad brush.I live here.I am a member of the Minutemen.When we have armed cartel with automatic AK-47`s on our side of the border along I-8 and have spotter positions on hilltops with communication gear,then I am anti-immigration.Ask the widow of the Border patrol guy killed 2 weeks ago how she feels. Everything to you seems to be radical.I never see KKK.I own a gun and am far from a radical.I am pro life,but don`t shoot doctors.I am one.The three people who killed that child were burglars and got caught in a drug breakin and had nothing to do with defending the border.Get you eyes checked.Your vision is impaired!
'
Anti-immigration extremists murder girl and father in Arizona.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-5089065-504083.html
Malcom X's killing was a Black Muslim mafia-style gang hit - most likely ordered (some think) by Louis Farrakan
Lunatic, ok.
But a canary in the coal mine of broader political insanity?
A more succinct version of my point above, which also got junked.
YES. Great Point.
The people calling for tougher restrictions now were the bomb throwers and snipers of the 1960s. They know what kind of havoc people like them can wreak, and they are bound and determined to ensure that their own tactics do not end up being used against them.
truth
No question this was the random act of a madman and doesn't have a political factor.
Having said that, I would also suggest that as fear and frustration among the general population heat up near the boiling point, is is increasingly likely that such lunatics, whether with or without a defined political agenda, will feel compelled to turn fantasy into action.
So even this seemingly meaningless event could signal something about our future.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256899/sheriff-dupniks-irresponsibi...
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256868/rush-responds-matthew-shaffer
Limbaugh on Dupnik: “This sheriff is an embarrassment to committed law-enforcement officials all over the country.”http://is.gd/kzHhf
In NYT, Brooks slams Huffpo, Kos, Olbermann, and 'others' for 'vicious charges' made after AZ shootings. Others=Krugman? http://ow.ly/3BIID
Daily Caller: Fellow commenters at UFO conspiracy website questioned Jared Lee Loughner’s sanity in threads >http://bit.ly/fWiuhg
Well, here is one too weird to be true, but is ---- Loughren went to a high school run by Obama marxist sponsors Bill Ayers, Klonsky and Obama through the Annenberg foundation in Chicago though the "Small Schools Workshop."
http://hubpages.com/hub/Loughner-Attended-School-...
.
Told ya, he was on Team Obama 2007.............he is a Democrat, pot smoking, leftist.
He had an axe to grind, about not getting enough attention, or acknowledgement from her camp.
Gabrielle has met him face to face.
The schools in Arizona are terrible. I think we rate #49 right above Mississippi.
The retired people here could give a shit about the future of our kids so they always vote to cut funding. Now the Christianists are taking over and home schooling kids to teach them the Bible. Look for this to be a ignorant and lost generation.
I thought home schoolers did pretty well, significantly above public schools?
Econophile/Daily Capitalist's analysis is incorrect. This was a shooting targeting political figures at a political event done with premeditation.
While there are preambles, this is the first effort of the low classes counterattacking the Establishment; its leadership cadres on their home ground.
Warren Buffett sez the upper classes are waging class warfare and are winning.
Guess what, the lower classes are fighting back and they are using live ammunition. The Establishment has (wisely?) choked off all other means of redress.
The elites must realize there are an unlimited supply of Loughners lurking @ the fringes of American society along with an almost unlimited number of targets of opportunity. Ironically, in the new 'class war' calculus, millionaire media figures such as Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are both the most likely and most accessible targets.
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
The above piece by Jeff Harding of The Daily Capitalist, has just about the biggest whopper of a lie I have ever seen in a Zero Hedge article.
This Jeff Harding - either a liar or an idiot or insane himself - writes:
« ... no great conspiracies have been uncovered behind Lee Harvey Oswald, James Early Ray, and Sirhan Sirhan ... »
Absolutely f**king crazy. All f**king three of the assassinations involving these people, have been shown to be cases where the official USA story is f**king bullsh*t.
Martin Luther King's own FAMILY MEMBERS declared their own certainty that James Earl Ray didn't do it ... (Harding didn't spell Ray's name right...)
This guy Jeff Harding who wrote this article is a f**king denier of reality ... even if he believes US government propaganda himself, it's crazy of him to deny these things are not HUGELY controversial.
May he never again soil the hallowed web pages of ZH ... big demerit to Econophile for posting such idiocy here.
Why do these shooters always seem to have 3 names? Lee harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, Jared Lee Loughner.........
...duly noted...the FBI thanks you for your insight and will now be using a new and highly sophisticated algo to spot would be assasins.
Dude, you dont have three names?.
Likely yes, you just havent shot anyone of import yet.
Oh yeah, penisouraus lee erecti.....keep forgettin the lee name :-)
Truth.
Excellent comment.
OK, OK. I really, really apologize for misspelling Ray's name. Just don't shoot me, bro.
Better buy your protection soon. Glock sales are going through the roof.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/01/11/20110111arizona-shooti...
I wonder if armeggedon will present itself as a good buying opportunity?