It’s time to reject violent political rhetoric

Note: It’s late Saturday evening (January 8th) as I begin this post. It will be past midnight when I finish it.

I completed a different post earlier today, but just before I finished it I became aware of the shooting tragedy in Tucson. Representative Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8th district) was shot in the head and is fighting for her life; Federal Judge John Roll and five others, including a nine-year-old girl, were shot and killed, and 13 others were critically wounded in the senseless shooting spree this morning.

The events in Arizona affected me profoundly, and I’ve decided to share a thought or two that I’m having about the situation.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Late this afternoon, I learned of the shootings that took place today in Tucson, Arizona. Everything else immediately seemed to stop for me – other sounds and words were tuned out as I followed the developments on the internet.

In the evening, I caught most of a special edition of Countdown with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC. I don’t usually watch Olbermann (although his views align more closely with mine than those of the talking heads at Fox News do), because I tend to shy away from overtly partisan news, and both Olbermann and the pundits at Fox News can be sensational to varying degrees. This was an extraordinary occasion, though, and as such, there was a special edition of Countdown.

On the handful of occasions that I’ve watched Olbermann’s show, I’ve had to bring some grains of salt with me. This is not because there is no truth in what he says, but an astute mind will challenge what he hears or reads by looking for facts and sorting through BS.

With that said, I’m glad that I tuned in.

Olbermann’s voice faltered occasionally, belying an internal struggle with emotions at times. His sadness and passion for the subjects discussed on the program were clearly evident to me, and I was grateful for that.

He spent a significant portion of his time talking about the subject of violent rhetoric and its place in politics; or rather, the idea that it should have no place in politics. And in his closing “Special Comment,” he declared that the time for violent speech is over, and called for an immediate end to all use of violent metaphors and rhetoric from politicians, activists, and people of influence on radio, television, and other media (I’m paraphrasing).

He also apologized multiple times for making violent remarks on one occasion in particular, made clear that he did not condone them, and further apologized for any other time that he might have made remarks that inadvertently were violent or caused someone to think that he wished for something terrible to happen to another person.

To watch his Special Comment, click here. Other portions of the program can be found on the Countdown site at MSNBC as well.

But this post is not about Keith Olbermann. His show was merely a part of my Saturday night experience this weekend.

* * * * *

Two months ago, I wrote a couple of posts about the deteriorating quality of public discourse. In my post from November 9th, I touched on the idea that people often don’t seem to be aware of the consequences of their words and actions, particularly in this age where it is possible to make and publish statements publicly (and, in some cases, anonymously). From some of our country’s most prominent political figures and personalities down a certain subset of people who litter chat channels in video games and other social outlets, it seems that modesty, politeness, and respect have been been widely eschewed in favor of disrespect, taunting, name-calling, hate-spew, and violent speech of one kind or another.

As I was reading about what happened in Tucson, I began to think about Sarah Palin’s political hit list, the controversial “crosshairs map,” which she posted on her website last year (and removed shortly after the shooting occurred). I then thought about Bill O’Reilly, who referred to abortion doctor George Tiller (murdered during a service at his church on May 31, 2009), as “Tiller the baby killer” two dozen times on his show, according to Politifact. I thought of others who have recently shown a disquieting comfort or familiarity with violent or war-related speech, as used for political (or other) gain.

Keith Olbermann’s commentary closely matches my own feelings on the subject.

We don’t know, and perhaps we will never know, exactly why the shooter committed such a heinous set of crimes in Tucson. Perhaps he was encouraged in part by violent political rhetoric, perhaps not.

However…

In today’s world, we have access to astounding amounts of information – it’s at our fingertips and on our televisions. The majority of households in the U.S. have internet access, and nine in ten children are online in some fashion.

Keith Olbermann has called for an end to all use of violent rhetoric, metaphors, and speech, in our nation’s public political discourse, regardless of party, political position, or any other divisive associations. In the coming weeks, I know for a fact that we will see an as-yet-unknown number of public figures, as well as hordes of commenters on blogs and other social media, reject part or all of that idea because it came from a person who differs from them ideologically.

And while we may never know if any of the recent violent speech (etc.) had an impact on the killer’s motivations, it’s almost impossible to know for sure that those words weren’t taken the wrong way by someone.

Think about it. If a public figure makes a violent statement against someone, it could be read, heard or viewed by thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands or even millions, of people, including children and those who are mentally unstable.

Politics is a lot of marketing, and, despite all of the demographic studies that are done for both fields, at the end of the day, the message goes out to the general public, hitting its target audiences as well as others. If the wrong person gets a flippant or ill-considered message, the consequences could be tragic.

Again, we don’t know that anything negative will come of it. However, we also can’t be certain that the opposite will be true.

* * * * *

It starts with our leaders, parents, public figures, and mentors, .

In order to maintain a de facto civilized society, our leaders and public figures must set an example by dealing with one another respectfully and courteously. Political differences are a way of life, but we are all human beings – and not just “at the end of the day,” “when the dust settles,” etc.

Whether we believe it or not, our words make an impression on others. By speaking cautiously and treating others with respect, wherever we are in life (and on whatever platform or through whichever social media outlet), we lay the groundwork for positivity, well-being, growth…

And as citizens, we can’t stand silent and consider violence and violent speech acceptable. It can be eliminated, at least on a political level, if sensible people will collectively reject it.

Violence is simply awful. “Violent” is even a harsh-sounding word, appropriately describing its manifestation. The idea of a gunshot wound is absolutely horrifying in and of itself – it’s sudden, instant, irrevocable, and violent – and countless parents, widows, and friends of victims of violence have had their hearts broken when their loved ones have been taken away.

With that said: don’t become numb to violence and violent speech/rhetoric. It is not trivial. All of the “desensitization” that we hear about nowadays is something of a fallacy, because death is just as real as it was, and hits just as hard as it did, before violent video games, movies and lyrics became widely accepted. It certainly changed countless lives this weekend.

* * * * *

In closing, I realize that some of what I hope for is idealistic. It’s unrealistic to think that there will be a widespread elimination of the vitriol that we encounter way too often in our lives. However, maybe the events in Tucson will serve as a wake-up call to both politicians/public figures and citizens in general. Perhaps enough people will consider how they interact with one another that civility will gain market share, and public figures and officers will be held accountable for the quality of their discourse.

In the meantime, our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. I sincerely hope that Rep. Giffords will pull through, and will be able to have some quality of life again.

Course correction: thoughts on recognizing my own shortcomings, the nature of public discussion, and the focus of future posts

I have a confession to make.

I’ve had my tidies in a bunch over the past few weeks about several issues, mostly pertaining to online discourse.

I’m sorry about that.

I didn’t start this blog to be a dick to people, and I feel that I was unfair to Ambrosine last week with regard to her take on Frostheim’s story about behaving badly in a PuG. Disagreeing with her wasn’t unfair, but when I reread my post, I realized that I never completed my thought about her post, and sort of left hanging the paragraph in question. I tried to clarify how I felt in the comments to my post, but she may never read anything on my blog again, for all that I know. Anyway, as a result, I’m afraid that readers could have taken what I said in the post to mean that I felt that her post was worthy of simply being dismissed, which is not the case. And that was unfair of me.

That said, I apologize to Ambrosine, and others who read my words, for my own poor communication on that particular point in the article.

My own personal conundrum

Words and thoughts can come from different places. Rational places. Emotional places. I find that, sometimes, those places are at odds within me.

I care quite a bit about my country, its people, and its government. My reactions to current events may come out of anger, frustration, hope, or some point along the skepticism/cynicism line, depending on the circumstance(s). There are issues that I feel strongly about, along with some issues that I am unsure of, or feel undereducated about. Some of my values are very different from those that I had growing up, while others are very similar. Many of my views on these issues are based on rational thought, but my reactions to how the issues are dealt with can come from an emotional place that conflicts with my rational self, and sometimes hinders my ability to separate fact from spin, and logic from bias… if that makes any sense.

I see a lot of good in the world, every day. I also see a lot of stuff that bothers me. As such, there is often much that I want to get off my chest in written form, and yet I continue to feel under-qualified to do so. Until lately, people who read my blog semi-regularly haven’t seen a lot of my opinions on matters that seem to be hot topics – I just haven’t felt that I have the ability to say what I want to say and be satisfied with the way that I’ve communicated it to the reader. Therefore, most of my writing doesn’t really touch on many hot-button issues.

My own personal conundrum, continued – rational vs. emotional

To go a little further into this, let me give an example. I am very passionate about the First Amendment. Rationally, I am completely in tune with the idea that it is a fundamental element of our country, a cornerstone of our way of life. My rational self tells me that debate and discourse are good.

On the other hand, my emotional self hates conflict and is discouraged by the often uncouth nature of online and political discussion. Civility in discourse is very important to me.

There are certainly multitudes of people who express themselves eloquently online, in the news, in-game, and on the street, and I appreciate their discussions, even if I disagree when their viewpoints conflict with mine. However, I’ve previously expressed my disappointment over some of the destructive conversation that takes place online, and that feeling extends to the public and political spheres as well. My instinctive reaction to that type of conversation is to recoil in disgust, or to dismiss it. I usually try to deal with it in a mature manner; however, my tolerance for it has been dwindling rapidly lately, and “dealing with it maturely” ends up having a “bottling up your feelings”-type of effect. When my tolerance reaches a certain low point, the guardians of my own judgment go on vacation and I start reacting to stuff publicly, in spite of my usual reluctance to do so.

The results end up being emotional, reactionary. In spite of what I rationally accept and endorse (free speech is free speech, whether you like it or not), I hate the way that people express themselves sometimes…

Blogger: “Here’s a funny story: I made a less-than-noble decision in a game, but I learned something that I felt was exciting and decided to share…”

Tweetsters: “OMG!! Blogger should be fired for asshattery! He sucks anyway, and always has!”

Me: “Blarg! I find your method of communication to be one or more of the following – offensive, disrespectful, egregious, dismissive, ridiculous, to whatever degree – so I’m going to over-verbalize my reaction to such an extent that my point will be obscured, blah blah blah…”

No, no… This is not how I want to bring readers to my blog, and is not the kind of stuff that I want to draw inspiration from in order to have something to write about.

If I were able to write more clearly, concisely, rationally, and with better structure to my arguments, I might reconsider taking inspiration from these sorts of topics. Those, however, are skills that I don’t think that I’ve fully developed at this point.

Public Discourse: the way that we say something affects how people hear what we say

I’m not sure when it started, but at some point in my adulthood I noticed that I react pretty negatively toward inflammatory “discussion.” In politics, for example, when disagreement over a talking point turns into personal attacks and provocative rhetoric, I, as a citizen, stop hearing the content and start reconsidering my impression of the person making the statements.

I have a friend who expresses a lot of anger about President Obama. His anger is not without good reason, as far as I can tell based on my own research into some of his concerns. However, to be honest, I stopped listening to him months ago, because the language that he uses to express his viewpoints is absolutely rife with over-the-top, accusatory tones, obscenities, and proposals of violent solutions to the issues that he cares about.

This saddens me, because the guy has a lot of good points to make, and I could probably learn from him. However, he seems to feel that the only way to be heard is to shout, and to punctuate his arguments with profanity and suggestions that the President (for example) should die, or be otherwise personally, physically harmed.

I don’t think that the President should be harmed. And I don’t think that our former President should be harmed, either. That’s pretty extreme.

There’s so much shouting. So many people seem to think that using fear, insults, exaggeration, and the word “fuck,” are great ways to emphasize their positions and make others listen to them; that the degree of  volume and extremity of their statements will reinforce the “right-ness” of their viewpoints.

I think that it’s unfortunate that ideas seem to come before respect of others, no matter the forum: “You retard!” in-game; “You’re a Nazi!” in politics; etc. In-game, at school, at work, in the media, we are all citizens of the world. That seems so unimportant to an alarming number of people today. I wonder how much poor communication stunts the growth of countries and the welfare of their people; at any rate, it’s a terrible example for the next generation.

In the context of world problems, discussion in and about video games ranks far lower in overall importance. However, the tone of the discussion affects me similarly. I’m more inclined to find an article interesting, and to consider the author’s points, if it is presented sanely and maturely. I’m less likely to respond positively (or even finish reading) if the author’s point is delivered in an inflammatory tone, or is smothered in profanity or insults.

I’m not saying that it’s necessarily “correct” of me to react that way. I’m saying that that’s the way that I react.

So here I am

I feel that I have difficulty, sometimes, writing in a compelling manner – that is, expressing my views in a clear and concise manner first, with maybe some emotional emphasis added. Rather, I feel that some of my writing lately has come from an emotional (indignant) place, which has resulted in rambling posts and lower editing standards on my part. The end result is that I say things in a way that I may not be proud of upon reflection.

I do not want to be a part of the problem. I want to write posts that I enjoy rereading. I don’t want to make the mistake of expressing a view of someone’s work that is incomplete or otherwise doesn’t accurately reflect the respect that I have for his/her opinion.

I am considering following my intuition, which, right now, is telling me that I should perhaps curtail my discussion of these types of topics on my blog. I would love to be a bit more articulate on these subjects. However, when I look at the number of potential posts that I’ve discarded over the past couple of weeks, and the two “rant-y” ones that I’ve actually published recently, I don’t think that I’m ready to go down that road at this point.

I’m definitely not saying that I’m not going to post anymore. I’m still planning to post about WoW, music, sports, and other stuff that I find interesting. I just think that I’ll be a happier blogger if I don’t put out content that isn’t up to my own standards.

* * * * *

Post-Script: This post doesn’t seem to flow as well as I would like it to – which is, by this point, a common theme with me. I apologize for that. Trust me, it was way worse before I reworked and edited it!

From the feed reader: recent posts of interest

A few articles I’d like to share…

• Alex Skolnick, lead guitarist for thrash band Testament and his own jazz group, Alex Skolnick Trio, posted about The Shred Epidemic late last month at Guitarplayer.com. As a talented guitarist who brings a lot of melody and musicality to his leads, his take on the issue is compelling.
• Nirvana bassist Krist Novoselic writes a blog for Seattle Weekly, and a few weeks ago he wrote an article about Analog vs. Digital as a recording medium. I know a lot about music, but he gave an interesting inside perspective on analog tape and the challenges it presents during the remastering process.
• On a different front, Krist wrote recently about Wyclef Jean’s bid to become the new president of Haiti, relating his own short experiences as a candidate for Lt. Governor of Washington in 2004.
• Joe Posnanski wrote recently about the Heart and Hustle Award, which Derek Jeter has inexplicably never won.
• The new issue of Spin magazine has an article by David Peisner about this year’s Soundgarden reunion. Part of the article, containing bits of interviews with each of the four members, is available at Spin.com.
• Icedragon at Druid Main recently posted a series of articles about druid macros, and I found them to be a very helpful resource. They are Macros Revisited, /Cast [Advanced] Macros, and C-c-c-combo Breaker! Dual Macros.

 

Recent links of interest

My personal output has been even lighter than usual over the past week. The main reason for this is that I am working on a long post about politics, and I’m struggling with wrapping it up. I need to write a conclusion, and I also need to think carefully about the cohesiveness of the piece before I post it, because I have a tendency to be less than concise when I write. So, there’s plenty of revision still to go with that one…

On Wednesday I made a day trip to visit with my brother and his family. It was a fun, crazy day, the only way it can be when 2-year-old twins (and a 6-month-old infant who’s teething and crawling) are involved!

I’ve also been reading a lot. Books. Yeah.

Meanwhile, here are a few highlights from the posts I’ve read over the past week or two.

Click here to read Krist Novoselic's May 4th post, "Analog Music & Cars in the Digital Age"

• Nirvana bassist / political activist Krist Novoselic has a blog on Seattle Weekly’s Reverb, where he posts twice a week on music and political issues. An avid lover of vinyl, he reviewed the Rolling Stones’ Exile On Main Street [Super Deluxe Edition] last Friday, and yesterday he reminisced about Shocking Blue, a classic but under-appreciated band from Holland whose “Love Buzz” Nirvana recorded for their first 7″ single. Krist is an affable and very intelligent guy who absolutely loves music, and his posts are a lot of fun to read.
• John (BBB) posted a humorous idea regarding the return of CC in Cataclysm, and ReversionLFM of Looking For More made it come to life!
• Andrew of Systemic Babble wrote a great rebuttal to an article on Gamesbrief by Nicholas Lovell, who stated that Steam’s “monopoly” on PC downloads would be the downfall of the PC game industry. The discussion in the comments is very interesting as well. Additionally, he recently posted a wonderful link to The Scale of the Universe, and Friday’s post regarding the most recent developments involving Israel really resonated with me.
• Jacemora, Druid of the Moon, followed up on the idea of using a Mangle-spam rotation. Mangle vs Shred seemed to be a popular question when the changes to Mangle and the Glyph of Mangle went live with Patch 3.3.3. Many ferals, myself included, seemed to feel at the time that Shred and its positional requirement were still the best option for high damage. His verdict: Shred is indeed the way to go.
• Gordon at We Fly Spitfires wrote an immensely popular (and very funny) post this week entitled MMO or Baby? He also has a review of the WoW Remote Auction House beta, and since he posts almost every day, there’s plenty of other good stuff to check out.
• In Wednesday’s Tree of Life post, Keredria talks about Christian guilds, and mentions that she may post more on religion in WoW in the future. I hope she does, because her post was entertaining and informative.
• Finally, Dr. Tom Bibey wrote about his favorite bookstores in a manner that made me immediately want to go book and music shopping at mom-and-pop stores… again… yes, I have a problem!

Enjoy! Hopefully I’ll finish the piece I mentioned above sooner than later… or some other legit post, at least.

Random linkage, new Gravatar

New Gravatar photo

Here are some links from the past week or so that have given me food for thought:

• John, the Big Bear Butt himself, posted a massive list of book recommendations on May 14th, and it has literally (um, no pun intended?) flipped my mental “to-read” list upside down. While I’m still working on finishing up a few books myself, I’ve found myself wondering what I’m going to read down the road, other than a few suggestions from friends. This post just opened up a can of whoop-ass on my feeble reading goals. My old guild master, Secure, has been recommending the Wheel of Time series for as long as I’ve known him, and this list just made that bug in my ear buzz a little louder… Book recommendations are never bad, as far as I’m concerned!
• Kara at Vomi Mot wrote a couple of days ago about Dungeons & Dragons and Christianity. Her article is a reaction to an article by William Schnoebelen of chick.com, in which he details his experiences with D&D, along with his road through witchcraft, satanism, and finally to Christianity. While I don’t have any opinions that I feel qualified to express here, I found her response to be well thought-out.
• My friend Greg at parkinthepark has some commentary and information on Voltage Pictures’ massive lawsuit against tens of thousands of people who pirated “The Hurt Locker” online. He also sent me a link to an article on the subject by Peter Serafinowicz at Gizmodo entitled “Why I Steal Movies… Even Ones I’m In.” This is a compelling battle to watch; as fast as technology and the behaviors of users evolve (and as much as producers and publishers of various media attempt to keep up), the collective business model is adapting with an alarming lack of swiftness. Check the links for more info.
• Gordon at We Fly Spitfires has posted several items that intrigue me (doesn’t he always? LOL!). On the 14th, he posted about his new toon he created, with backstory, for Age of Conan. The next day, his topic was Should I Purchase The Half-Price LotRO Lifetime Subscription? If I had a PC, I’d be tempted myself… May 17th brought an article about racism in MMOs, and yesterday’s post concerned the subject of the death of role-playing in MMOs.
• Andrew at Systemic Babble posted a link to an Impressive 3D Optical Illusion, as well as an article about a new measure proposed in Canada’s House of Commons by Liberal MP Keith Martin that would see Canada’s government encouraging parents to prevent their children from watching TV or playing video games one night per week.
• Larísa over at the Pink Pigtail Inn has an interesting idea: what if we all stopped blogging (and reading blogs) about World of Warcraft until Cataclysm is released? She also posted today about resistance to the concept that Blizzard is a business, while Tobold has a response to Larísa’s blogging proposal.
• Keredria at Tree of Life posted an educational article on Government Structures in WoW, based on information from wowwiki. Honestly, I’m ashamed to admit that this is a subject I had really never spent much time thinking about, but some of the governments they list for certain zones are fascinating.
• Finally, Ronnie James Dio died on Sunday morning of stomach cancer. The legendary vocalist was an inspiration and hero to several generations of rock and metal musicians, and his recordings with Rainbow, Black Sabbath, Dio, and Heaven and Hell are some of the most revered and respected of all time. You can google his name and find tons of information about him, but for a long list of remembrances and tributes, check out blabbermouth.net (links to their search results for “Dio”).

There it is: I’ve laid bare some of my internet/blog-reading interests for the past week… Now maybe I can go work on a real blog post of my own at some point today!

On politics… or not?

When I began this blog in October, I stated the following in my first post:

“I don’t have to have a focus – I expect that I can write about my interests – music, politics, games, the outdoors, sports, and other subjects – competently enough to satisfy my urge to publish something.”

Today, during a break at work, I was thinking about the blog, and this quote, specifically about how almost all of my posts have been about either gaming, music, my computer, or, on occasion, photos taken on my walks. While I enjoy writing about all of those subjects, and would in fact like to continue and expand the scope of my writing about them, I still feel like my blog is too one-dimensional. Or rather, that it’s not multi-dimensional enough.

The particular thought that I had today was in reference to my suggestion that I might write about my political thoughts, or more simply “write about politics.” I found myself asking, why am I not approaching that subject?

There are probably a few reasons why I haven’t. One of the main reasons is that I am tired of the real news, tired of the sensationalism and constant analysis and other BS. I used to have about 10 websites I would visit regularly; I recently deleted CNN.com and HuffingtonPost.com from my bookmarks because I realized that going to those sites was becoming a total drag. I don’t know if the excitement of last year’s national election process gave way to burnout, but that could be a part of it. Another thing that really annoyed me was the prevalence of entertainment news and other drivel that seemed to receive a disproportionate amount of coverage. In particular, the constant analysis of Michelle Obama’s style choices on HuffPost was making me nauseous. So I edited News websites out of my daily routine, sticking with NPR on my short commute as my lone source for national and international news.

My real life situation also takes away from my interest in politics and national news. Managing a store during the holiday shopping season, as I’ve mentioned before, can suck the life away from you. When I’m handling a high amount of stress at work, and bringing that mental fatigue home with me, it’s much more difficult for me to put attention and energy toward the crazy crap that happens in government.

All in all, I probably won’t write too much about politics, and really it was just a thought when I was making my first post. I have definite opinions on most of the issues, and may write about them as I feel moved to do so, but I’m not going to worry about it if I don’t for a while.