The Times has openly questioned how the rhetoric of Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann and the like, while Faux News has complained about how unfair that is and has gotten defensive about it. The truth is, both sides are right to some extent, but neither is being very productive.
Let's start with the few "facts" we do know. Many people have pointed to Loughner's list of favorite books as proof positive that he is either a crazy liberal or a crazy conservative. The only crazy thing about trying to decipher this guy based on his book list is the attempt itself. Because he listed "Mein Kampf" does not make him a Nazi, and because he listed "The Communist Manifesto" does not make him a Communist. Hell both of those books might be listed as favorites by a nonpartisan historian or philosophy professor as favorites.
However, Loughner did attempt to assassinate a democratic politician and killed a judge who was known to be against Arizona's new immigration laws. Of course, neither of those things makes him a conservative nut necessarily, but the speculation that he is a right wing crazy makes more sense than the alternative. Nevertheless, it is still speculation. And of course even if this guy is a conservative nut, doesn't the Faux News stipulation that he's crazy still hold true? Can we absolve political leaders of violent rhetoric because the guy who pulled the trigger has a few screws loose? After all, for all the crazy liberals and crazy conservatives who exist, the guy who committed the crime seems to be loco. I'm pretty unabashedly against the conservative movement and the Republican party, but I'm not out to kill anyone.
The problem with this is that people with other issues are the most likely to fall for this kind of spew. People angry about the new healthcare law's death panels aren't out shooting politicians. Those people, mislead though they may be, aren't crazy enough to kill. However when we send a silly, perhaps violent message to EVERYONE, some of the crazies are going to hear it. Sending a message that may be violent to everyone and then having only the crazy people act on it does not absolve the message sender. It's not fair to say, "It's not my fault, that guy is crazy." Toning down the message may be a good idea.
At the same time, it's also not fair to blame Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck and the Tea Party for this mess. America would be better off without them, but none of them ordered this assault, and dumb and reprehensible as they may be, they do have a right to promote their stupidity. Sarah Palin's infamous crosshair map wasn't a coded message to shoot politicians. It has been pointed out that Democrats did the same thing. Any map with someone in the crosshairs is a bad idea, but it's also allowed to make such a map, and the existence of said map is not a veiled order to assassinate. It's a childish way of getting people riled up to make a point.
What we're left with is this. It seems that Jared Loughner is crazy, and no one, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and the Tea Party included would ever advocate for this. I actually believe both Palin and Beck when they say they're praying for the victims. Having said that, we routinely pick on athletes when they compare themselves to soldiers and rightfully so. It is important to differentiate between something like a football game and a war. It's also important to differentiate between a political election, issue, or figure and an actual battle.
We would also be wise to remember that our words do have an impact. I generally like cliches, but "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me," is a quite terrible one. Charles Manson is in prison for having ordered the killing of people without ever killing someone himself. Our words can do quite a bit of damage, and though we do have the right to free speech, sometimes taking it too far can convince the wrong people to do the wrong thing.
Saturday's events were nothing short of a national tragedy. Anytime an innocent person dies a senseless death death is tragic. And while I agree that this event shouldn't be used for political gains, it should make us face a stark reality: people, even Americans, can be influenced by words, ideas and people, and they will do terrible things in the name of those words, ideas and people. I'm not here to comment on who Jared Loughner listened to, what he believed in, or why he did what he did. I am here to lament the deaths of six innocent people and to hope that this tragedy will serve a reminder that no matter what a person's beliefs or words, there is no justification for killing them.
No comments:
Post a Comment