Jan 10, 2011

The New York Times opinion piece “Tombstone Politics”, by Timothy Egan, correctly in my opinion places the blame for the Arizona Shootings on irresponsible use of language. The issue of what constitutes ‘free speech’ will perhaps increasingly become a part of public debate. The recent case of Wikileaks is another facet of the same issue.

However, the recent political rhetoric, has specifically used language that was full of symbolism, where the nature of action called for was quite clearly suggestive of violence. Once these ideas get out in the public domain, how they will manifest is of course not in anyone’s control. Just because the person who ultimately carries out the act is declared to be psychologically incapacitated, does not absolve the originator of the text from responsibility.

Perhaps there was a time when our local mechanisms of social control were more robust. Maybe, someone in the perpetrator’s immediate circle would have noticed and acted on abnormal behavior, preventing tragedy. I do not know how widespread the issue is, but clearly, those triggers are not working. In case after case, evidence is found post-facto that indicates that there were enough signals of malicious intent. Just as in the case of the Arizona shooter, who apparently had detailed assassination plans.

If society is changing to where it cannot proactively spot and manage its deviants, then we must revisit the norms and responsibilities that go with free speech, particularly if one is an influential public figure.

In that sense, I completely agree with the NYT opinuon. I do not however share his optimism that this incident will lead to a permanent change in behavior.

Inundated as we are with information we now have a very short collective memory. We will back on the air spewing violent invective, since those are the words and tone we live by these days.