Month: April 2007

I emphasize that the following is not an attempt to politicize a tragedy, but merely an observation about human nature based on some pretty indisputable facts.

Right now this country is reeling, trying to make sense of the senseless deaths of thirty-two innocent people who died due to the actions of a single obsessed, unhinged individual. We call this a national tragedy.

In Iraq, it’s called a Monday. Day after day after day, the populace of that wartorn country has to deal with losses as calamitous and pointless.

Now…what typically happens in a tragedy such as this? Well, in America, sooner or later, the search for blame begins. It’s human nature. You can’t blame the perp: He’s dead. So we search for someone still alive to vent our spleens upon. Someone to whom we can say, “If it weren’t for you, then this wouldn’t have happened.” When the Twin Towers fell, that blame played out in Senate hearings. The blame for Virginia Tech will inevitably play out as well, with leading candidates for excoriation being (a) the school, (b) the shooter’s parents, (c) anyone who advocates easy and legal access to guns.

With all that as a given, doesn’t it make sense that the Iraqis, being as human as us, would be looking for someone to blame for an environment where our aberration is their way of life? Who are they going to target? Saddam? He’s dead. Bombers? They’re usually dead after the attack as well. Who’s left?

Us.

And that anger manifests itself in the only way it can: More violence against those whom they feel were responsible.

Which is why anyone who thinks that there’s going to be an end in the cycle of violence against Americans in Iraq is betting against human nature itself. The blame will continue. The anger will continue. And the deaths will continue. We will try to expunge our sense of dismay and go back to a state of normalcy. For Iraq, death, anger, blame and revenge IS the state of normalcy.

That’s why they hate us.

In case you were wondering.

PAD

As I feared, the previous thread on Virginia Tech is rapidly escalating into partisan politics discussion. So I am asking that all posters on that thread restrict their commments to extending condolences or, if they actually knew Jamie (as friends typically called Christopher) share their recollections. In the meantime, feel free to use this space to discuss broader societal issues.

I think here’s what we can expect to see over the next months, as we move beyond shock and disbelief into anger.

1) Law suits filed by aggrieved families against Virginia Tech authorities for their failure to lock down the campus in the intervening two hours, while investigations are held to determine whether Virginia Tech authorites were to blame.

2) Considering the theme of parental abuse that reveals itself in the shooter’s unproduced play scripts, investigations into the shooter’s parents to determine if there was indeed child abuse present. If so, possible law suits on the basis that their abuse resulted in their son’s actions and therefore they bear responsibility.

3) Advocates of gun control holding this up as another example of how gun laws should be made stricter, considering that the shooter acquired his weapon legally.

4) Advocates of unrestricted gun ownership holding this up as another example of how gun laws should be abolished because if everyone in the college had been packing, they could have fought back. Because in a confined environment where there’s inevitably going to be drinking, partying, intense romances, and scads of young people lacking many aspects of maturity, that’s what you really want to have on a daily basis: Lots of firepower.

5) An upswing in incidents of students who write essays/poems/short stories themed around violence suddenly finding themselves tagged as potential shooters and being suspended or expelled.

PAD

It’s not as if the massacre in Virginia isn’t already a tragedy, but I thought I’d mention that–for anyone who is familiar with SF writer Michael Bishop–his son, Christopher, was one of the faculty members slain in the assault.

Our condolences go out to his family in this time of unimaginable loss.

PAD

The thing is, guys like Sharpton and Jackson, they were just doing same-old same-old.

The one’s I’m really annoyed with is the National Association of Black Journalists. They were the first ones out of the gate to call for the firing of Don Imus, and that’s part of what gave the story legs.

Let us put aside for a moment the notion that if someone wanted to form a group called the National Association of White Journalists, with membership limited to Caucasians, such a move would be roundly condemned as blisteringly, unforgiveably, blatantly racist.

The NABJ should have been the first, foremost defenders of the spirit of the First Amendment. To the notion that, if someone is shouting at the top of their lungs things that you find disagreeable, then the proper response is to shout back at the top of yours. In a free society, you go for the words of your opposition, not the throat.

In other words, people whose livelihoods depend upon the coin of free exchange of ideas should have been the first ones out of the box to declare, “We disagree with everything Don Imus says, but will defend to the death his right to say it.”

But they didn’t. They betrayed the fundamentals of a free press by deciding that they wanted to shut Don Imus down. Popeye-like, they decided that this was all they could stands cause they couldn’t stands no more. Their belief, apparently, was that they shouldn’t have to tolerate Imus’s racist opinions anymore.

Except they were wrong. Because that’s the price you pay for living in a free society. One’s business should always be with what your opponent says, not with your opponent himself, and people calling themselves journalists should have understood that.

The answer to free speech is always more free speech…not the shutting down of that speech.

PAD

Popular Hawaiian crooner Don Ho, best known for his rendition of “Tiny Bubbles,” has passed away at the age of 76.

In a related story, a firestorm of complaints over language has resulted in three radio personalities being fired for reporting the death of a Ho.

PAD

Been a while since I’ve done a straightforward Q&A. So post your questions here about my work or my thoughts on stuff or wha tever and I’ll do my best to answer them. Please, for God’s sake, one question each.

PAD

It’s bad enough that the definition of “news” has come to mean stories about bad jokes from shock jocks and paternity tests. That stories which were once the purview of tabloids are now routinely given as much, if not more, play on major news outlets as stories that actually have some worth.

So what’s the latest “news” off the AOL feed?

Kirsten Dunst says she likes to smoke pot.

Aside from the minor name irony of Mary Jane liking Mary Jane, an LA actress says she likes to smoke pot? My God, how is this REMOTELY news? Tell me a staunch anti-drug advocate is found stoned, and that’s a story, but an LA actress? You’re kidding, right? What next? Jerry Seinfeld announces he likes jokes? Or, as another poster commented on the Imus thread, this just in: Water is wet.

PAD