Jan
10
2011
Political violence and the Internet are a deadly duo
Author: Barrett RaineyPolitical violence and murder are nothing new. They’ve been around since before the time of Christ and were part of the everyday life of cavemen. Shooting or attempted murder of one more politician in Arizona is hardly breaking precedent. Tragic? Yes. New? No.
As long as there are weapons … usually guns … available to people who live on society’s edges, attempts to kill politicians everywhere will not go away. Just in my lifetime, four of our presidents have been targeted on America’s streets; two of them hit. It makes no difference whether it’s a crazy stage actor, Puerto Rican separatists or drugged-up junkies. Anybody with a violent streak and $50 can become the latest in a long line of assassins. It will never end.
Even the pumped up and often irresponsible hate rhetoric of jerks like Limbaugh, Beck and company is not unique. Crackpots trying to stir up an otherwise lethargic populace with distortions and outright lies have been around for centuries. You’re not going to see an end to them, either.
But there is something new; something Brutus, Booth, Squeaky Frohm and Gordon Hinkley didn’t have. The Internet. You certainly can’t place all the blame there and I wouldn’t try. Yet when the Net is coupled with the extremes of right wing talk radio, millions of daily hate emails, a society willing to accept violence for fun and profit and the unchecked demagoguery extant in this country, there is added kerosene for the fire.
The Net provides electronic gathering places which can give a sense of “family” and purpose to people who used to be loners, more often than not, isolated with and by their fear and hatred. These damaged and defective people suddenly are not alone; they “belong” to others equally as deranged. They’re accepted as “normal.”
One of the first things the media in this country did within hours of the Tucson shooting was a canvass of Facebook, Twitter and other “social” networks. They went to the Internet to find out who the shooter was, where he lived, what he looked like, what he thought and any other trivia that could be scavenged. It was all right there. Right in everybody’s old computer and right on everybody’s old Internet.
What they found was an assortment of flotsam and gibberish. Rambling and sometimes incoherent writings. But they also found links to other sites and other names. And therein lies the root issue we have not dealt with and one which may defy solution.
Anarchists and other extremists now have a communication system. Where they used to operate alone, spouting their hatred to the walls, they now have chat rooms. They have instant, two-way conversations with others of like-mind who can feed the paranoia, validate violent rhetoric, give a sense that there are many who feel as they do so they must be justified and push the irrational off the deep end. To action.
They spend hundreds and hundreds of hours in that environment having their fantasies supported by others who, before the Internet, were just as isolated, just as lonely, just as powerless. Then they get in the car for the morning commute in a world they already hate and are fed a diet of lies and viciousness by the millionaire radio hate talkers who seem to them to be an extension of the world they just left on the Internet. More validation.
They go to a political party meeting for volunteers and hear others calling the President of the United States a foreigner, a liar, a Nazi, a socialist and more. Again, validation for someone who already thinks the government is out to get him.
On TV that night, pictures of rallies with signs spewing the same hate words and members of congress urging the protesters on. Validation from someone they might even have voted for.
So, it’s back to the Internet. New loner experiences to share, new feelings of frustration, new anger. And others are there, waiting in the chat room, to share similar experiences from a world viewed through a skewed and badly cracked prism. Validation.
If I sound harsh and critical of the technological marvel we call the Internet, I don’t mean to be. But, while you wouldn’t put a deranged 10-year-old behind the wheel of a 5,000 pound SUV and head ‘em down the street alone, we are doing just that with a communication system that is unfettered and which can produce results just as deadly. In the proper hands, that SUV probably wouldn’t kill anybody. In the proper hands, neither would the Internet. But how do you prevent it from being in the wrong hands?
The difference between a lynching and a parade is the attitude of the crowd following behind. The difference between using the Internet in ways intended and for national harm is also in the hands of the crowd.
I don’t have the answer. But we’d better find one.