Barry Weisberg says that in no other democratic country has the use of force been as pervasive
Wednesday, 15 August, 2012, 12:00am
BARRY WEISBERG
Shooters hike to a station during an instructional women's shooting league at the Dakota Hunting Club in Grand Forks, North Dakota. Eric Hylden/Grand Forks Herald/MCT
It is now routine for everyone in the US who has access to a microphone or the printed word to ask the question: "Why the mass shootings?" The answers always centre on two reasons. Either there is an attempt to explain the motive of the shooter or it is said that there are just too many guns.
First, a motive claims to explain why a person acted in a specific manner. But a motive is not a causal explanation of behaviour. In some instances, the perpetrator lives an unsatisfied life, feels threatened, and seeks to direct their hatred towards perceived threats. In cases of severe violence, the perpetrator often suffers from some form of mental illness.
Second is the discussion about guns. The second amendment to the US Constitution is outdated and a justification for gun violence. There are an estimated 270million civilian guns in the US - or 88.8 guns per 100 people. With each state having their own, individual gun control laws, effective gun control is impossible.
Yet, despite these two arguments, commentators are not prepared to recognise that the source of the problem is in the culture of the US itself. In no democratic country has violence been as pervasive and banal.
The country was founded on the genocide of the native people, pursued a course of religious puritan violence, and still retains blatant patterns of post-slavery racist violence. It pioneered the film and television industry in which violence has arguably been the most prevalent motif. And then there are the large numbers of young men who are conditioned by watching/playing hours of violent video games a day.
Former president Dwight Eisenhower understood the threat when he described the "military industrial complex". The US has been the only country to use nuclear weapons not once, but twice, against civilians. And it has been engaged in more military actions in foreign countries, has more military bases abroad, and spends more on its military budget, than all of the other countries of the world combined.
This gun violence will not change regardless of who is elected president this year. The Barack Obama government has demonstrated an utter lack of interest, or worse, political disdain, for helping the most disadvantaged communities where black-on-black violence occurs. Mitt Romney's deficient policies would worsen disadvantages, which could increase the numbers suffering from mental disorders that lead to violent outbursts.
The unprecedented number of gun shootings in the US is a product of a culture of violence unmatched anywhere in the world.
Barry Weisberg is the global cities reporter for Chicago Public Radio and an adjunct professor at Hong Kong University.
It pioneered the film and television industry in which violence has arguably been the most prevalent motif. And then there are the large numbers of young men who are conditioned by watching/playing hours of violent video games a day.
Former president Dwight Eisenhower understood the threat when he described the "military industrial complex". The US has been the only country to use nuclear weapons not once, but twice, against civilians. And it has been engaged in more military actions in foreign countries, has more military bases abroad, and spends more on its military budget, than all of the other countries of the world combined.
The unprecedented number of gun shootings in the US is a product of a culture of violence unmatched anywhere in the world.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Other countries have the same access to guns, video games, Hollywood, insanity, and the NRA, yet they don't have the homicidal maniac culture that is pervasive in the US.
I say the blame should be placed squarely on the management of the country.
The use of death and violence by the US government who owns more weapons than the entire rest of the world combined, is the reason the people believe that justification overrules right and wrong.
The federal government time and again has taken the position that death and violence is the solution to the worlds problems. The federal governments defense budget is that of the combined world. The U.S. weapons of war are the most advanced and they are always continuing to search for advancements in the lethalness of its weapons. The DoD partners with the corporate media to create more realistic video games glorifying U.S militarism and with Hollywood to produce pro military propaganda. With the continued bombardment of war propaganda and jingoism to convince to U.S. population to support the federal governments violent solutions to world problems, it is no wonder many Americans adopt the "violence is the solution" that the state drums into the psychology of the American public.
Switzerland ranks 4th in guns per capita and have a much lower gun death rate with 40 gun homicide in 2010. The difference is? They maintain neutrality in war and do not propagandize their population to support the violent militarism necessary for the expansion of empire. Their government use of weapons is for purely defensive purposes, America uses their military weapons pre-emptively.
As the writer said earlier, the country was founded on self justified homicide and genocide.
The girl who pushed the Indian man to his death in the subway self justified her own actions.
The people who shoot abortion doctors self justify their own actions.
Those who shoot up churches self justify their own actions.
Those who kill with drones self justify their own actions.
Those killed in the war on drugs are self justified by the killers on both sides. One side claims defense of society, and the other side claims self preservation.
The idea of thou shall not kill has been morphed and become socially acceptable as thou shall murder only with justification, or as allowed by law.
It's going to take a lot of dealing with the problems of the country in a non-violent manner to undo the damage already done to society.
Blaming the soldiers, blaming the gun nuts who know what the homicidal government is capable of, the government has everyone pointing the fingers of blame at others across the nation.
The fact is the government was founded by guns, and has steadily given itself more and more power to the point where life is cheap and disposable. Simply point and click and the drones destroy people anywhere on earth.
The gun violence is the reaction to previous actions.
The kid who just shotgun blasted the person who was bullying him in California, is a prime example. Death and violence has become the tool of choice for America for problem solving.
And as a chimp recently told me, the government is "we."
We need to change the way the "we, the government" solve problems.
The federal government time and again has taken the position that death and violence is the solution to the worlds problems. The federal governments defense budget is that of the combined world. ... The difference is? They maintain neutrality in war and do not propagandize their population to support the violent militarism necessary for the expansion of empire.
Now keeping that in mind and the fact that the government is "we, the people" the solution is very simple to recognize, but much harder to implement, because it goes against our core beliefs that America's greatness and freedom is built on superior weaponry.
We need ourselves to become the changes that we wish to see in society.
"We" need to end the war on drugs, which escalated the use of guns tenfold.
"We" need to stop drone attacks.
"We" need our police to stop shooting people in the streets without a trial.
"We" need to get our noses out of everyone else on Earth's business.
"We" need to not have hundreds of thousands of armed troops stationed around the world, providing targets for those seeking self justified revenge on any American.
"We need to power down Robo-Cop!"
Plus it would save us trillions and make new friends.
Now keeping that in mind and the fact that the government is "we, the people" the solution is very simple to recognize, but much harder to implement, because it goes against our core beliefs that America's greatness and freedom is built on superior weaponry.
We need ourselves to become the changes that we wish to see in society.
"We" need to end the war on drugs, which escalated the use of guns tenfold.
"We" need to stop drone attacks.
"We" need our police to stop shooting people in the streets without a trial.
"We" need to get our noses out of everyone else on Earth's business.
"We" need to not have hundreds of thousands of armed troops stationed around the world, providing targets for those seeking self justified revenge on any American.
"We need to power down Robo-Cop!"
Plus it would save us trillions and make new friends.
Yes, I agree, I've been saying that. Box thinks it's unpatriotic to separate yourself from a national identity. It begins by not voting and not consenting to the lesser of two evils that continue the same policies of violent militarism and empire expansion.
So don't personally identify with the federal government and its violent policies. Don't allow blind nationalism overwhelm you and pride in the military might when they fly the military jets over the next sporting event at the conclusion of the star spangled banner.
The flag doesn't define you, don't feel the need to defend every policy just because you were born under it. It's silly.
Not only should you defend these policies, but vocal dissension is a must.
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, speaks at a rally at the University of South Florida Sun Dome on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., on Sunday, Aug. 26, 2012.
Rep. Ron Paul, not one to shy away from controversy, has blasted the National Rifle Association for proposing that every school hire armed guards to protect against mass shootings, and has also condemned liberals for promoting more government control of guns.
Referring to the massacre in Newtown, Conn., Paul said, "Predictably, the political left responded to the tragedy with emotional calls for increased gun control. This is understandable, but misguided. The impulse to have government 'do something' to protect us in the wake of national tragedies is reflexive and often well intentioned. Many Americans believe that if we simply pass the right laws, future horrors like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting can be prevented. But this impulse ignores the self evident truth that criminals don't obey laws.
The political right, unfortunately, has fallen into the same trap in its calls for quick legislative solutions to gun violence. If only we put armed police or armed teachers in schools, we're told, would-be school shooters would be dissuaded or stopped. While I certainly agree that more guns equals less crime and that private gun ownership prevents many shootings. I don't agree that conservatives and libertarians should view government legislation, especially at the federal level, as the solution to violence."
Paul is one of the few Republican members of Congress to criticize the right over the gun issue. He is retiring from Congress but remains an iconic figure among libertarians.
Criticizing the NRA proposal, Paul said, "Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, x-ray scanners and warrantless physical searches? We see this culture in our airports, witness this shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders. This is the world of government provided 'security,' a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse." He argued that the federal government should not try to "pursue unobtainable safety" with state-approved security precautions, and said the government has "zero moral authority to legislate against violence."
Paul, a long-time congressman from Texas, added that the left and right are on the wrong track regarding the gun issue. "School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America," Paul said. "....Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal because it would require total state control over its citizens' lives. We shouldn't settle for substituting one type of violence over another."
He argued that new laws won't stop a mentally disturbed individual from getting a gun and killing people, as happened at the massacre in Newtown nearly two weeks ago. Twenty-six people were killed, including 20 children.
Paul said, "Real change can happen only when we commit ourselves to rebuilding civil society in America, meaning a society based on family, religion, civic and social institutions, and peaceful cooperation through markets."
Paul ran unsuccessfully for the Republican presidential nomination this year, supporting a severely restricted role for the federal government in national life and fewer U.S. military interventions abroad. He retains a strong following around the country and has pledged to continue speaking out on public issues after he leaves Congress this month.
I posted what I believe... but that doesn't fit the Rabid Right agenda... so they 'pretend'!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Yes, I agree, I've been saying that. Box thinks it's unpatriotic to separate yourself from a national identity. It begins by not voting and not consenting to the lesser of two evils that continue the same policies of violent militarism and empire expansion.
...
Not only should you defend these policies, but vocal dissension is a must.
True, vocal dissent is a must.
But not voting allows the "geniuses" in charge to continue their homicidal treatment of the world, with the patriot act and all the other methods of death destruction and attempted totalitarianism.
You have 2 main tools at your disposal, your voice and your vote.
The vote seemingly being the less powerful of the two.
Gun control laws are the initiation of the use of force. Libertarians believe that the use of force is appropriate against direct threats only. Initiating the use of force is the backbone of gun violence.
So if a 'libertarian' believed that Barack Obama is a 'direct threat' he is justified in using "force".
So if a 'criminal believes that L4Life is a "direct threat" he is justified in using 'force'!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
