House of Eratosthenes

So back to the Arizona shooting. We’re all split squarely down the middle on this thing; our pinhead columnists and authority figures are convinced it was an act of political extremism, whereas the red-blooded people with whole brains, are leaning toward the gunman being just-plain-nuts. The evidence is falling in behind the ideas of the people-with-whole-brains. But the jump-to-conclusions people have fancy titles and big, big names. I guess that’s why they don’t need to wait for facts like the rest of us.

We’ve all heard the arguments by now about why this might be Sarah Palin’s fault, and about why it might not be. Also, by now, I think it’s pretty clear it’s the latter argument that has carried the day. The facts keep on pouring in to help support it; the offerings of those who promote the former do not enjoy the benefit of such a crushing weight of friendly evidence; their motivations are extraordinarily suspect; and, for the most part, I think most people clearly understand the concept of “just plain nuts.” It typically means, and seems to mean here, that the subject is not particularly interested in any particular strain of ideology.

The left took on a mission to deftly pin this on the tea partiers. They failed.

B-u-u-u-t…not really. People are still following this story, and as of now anyone still following it has fully realized the whole proposition was stupid. Anyone who isn’t on the partisan fringe, that is. And neither fringe-side decides an election, or even part of an election. It’s the wishy-washy people who make the rules, for better or for worse. That’s how it works. And they “know” there’s nothing right-wing about this assassination attempt. The caveat has to do with why I put the word “know” in scare quotes like that.

We need to come to grips with an ugly truth about the mind of the casual observer. The mind of the scholar who is passionate about a certain subject only occasionally. We don’t like thinking about it because we all have this flaw.

I have a favorite analogy I like to use, and it is a crass one. You’re at a cocktail party and a man walks into the room, climbs up on top of the banquet table, drops his pants and defecates into the punch bowl. Simultanously, he points to a random partygoer and says, “Hey, you just dropped a turd into the punch bowl!” In other words, he points at somebody else and accuses them of doing exactly what he’s doing. Pretty silly, right?

Well, give it another second or two of serious consideration anyway. Because if you’re the guy he’s pointing at…think about it. It’s a “When did you stop beating your wife?” moment. There’s no suitable response. Oh sure it seems perfectly reasonable to say “What are you talking about, I’m not the guy taking a shit into the punch bowl, you’re the guy doing that.” Indeed, the personal observations of everyone in attendance will back this up. But…well…now you can see the connection to the Arizona shooting, I think. It doesn’t matter what the facts say. It doesn’t matter what people can see with their own eyes.

It’s something embedded deep within us, burned into our wiring. We see two people, each accusing the other of doing the same thing, and the attention span just shrivels like a raisin. We tune out. We walk away. It doesn’t matter if we’re watching one guy shit in the punch bowl and the other guy not doing it; the point is, we stop relying on our own senses. Our predilection is going to be to put the the two players on the same level even though logically, we know they do not belong there because they are not the same. We start to think “I don’t have a dog in this fight” even though we do.

So the mission to “deftly” pin this on the right wing, has failed, but it has also succeeded. The prevailing viewpoint, that one that has to have command over everything even if it cannot be explained, goes something like: Oh sure both sides do it, and both sides need to tone it down. We “know” that going even just this far is silly. As a commenter said on Althouse’s blog,

Anyone else find it creepy that new standard what me may and may not say is: How will it affect the behavior of an abviously crazy person who may or may not hear it?

We all find it creepy, we all find it risible, we all find it unworkable. But that’s the meme that will be carried forward.

And the evidence says that, if it does have to be toned down before the next politician or little girl gets shot, then it is the left that has far more work to do in the toning-down department.

The evidence says that. But remember: Man, table, turd, punch bowl. Doesn’t matter what the evidence says.

So Palin’s face will be the symbol of inflammatory rhetoric leading to shootings. Even if Barbara Walters, herself, has trouble buying into it. Our mistake is thinking that The Left is gambling something, putting something at risk, when they say plainly dumb things like “We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was.” We make a mistake in thinking they’re putting their credibility at stake chasing off after the Underpants Gnome theory of mass shootings by crazy people.

They don’t live in a world of facts, evidence, logic, exoneration, vindication, conviction, damnation, anything of the like. They live in a world of reverberation. Making ripples. Things becoming true just by being repeated over and over again; that is their world.

They do this stuff over and over again because it works. It failed here, but it also triumphed; and, on balance, it is a win. The exercise in face-to-phenomenon association has been a smashing success. Even better, the consensus that has emerged is that we need less contention and more peace. We’ll figure out what “peace” means later.

Meaning, it will be up to them to define it.

Meaning, “peace” will become just a matter of doing whatever they say. And finding a way to shut up that irresponsible, hatred-inciting hick from Wasilla for crying out loud!

That’s how they work. Whenever they get their way, the rest of us become less free. The chasm that separates us from truth and common sense, yawns just a little bit wider. We become a little bit less independent, and a little bit less whole. The net effect is that we decide more things while doing less real thinking.

Nobody wins except the guy who is selling a bad product. The guy who wants us to accept one product, reject another, and stay away from scrutinizing any ideas too closely, be they old or new.

Update 1/11/2011: Neal Boortz monitors the progress being made to channel this momentum into some kind of ban on talk radio.

Update 1/12/2011: Palin responds, and as usual is far classier — and more patient — than I am:

Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.

There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those “calm days” when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren’t designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders’ genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure.

Cross-posted at Washington Rebel.

Political Martyr?
- Kini | 01/11/2011 @ 04:03
Well as usual, they’ll only inflict as much direct damage as she’ll allow them to and she won’t be allowing them to.

People do hate to be programmed, though, once they realize that is what is taking place. I think the effectiveness of this tactic is cresting out.

Point is, though, as long as it retains any potential at all, they’ll keep trying it…again and again and again.
- mkfreeberg | 01/11/2011 @ 09:25
See, now, if you’d just waited a day you could have included the “suddenly” renewed calls for
Tighter proactive/mandatory “mental health” evaluation measures.
Increased “security” for bat shit crazy pols.
Sudden revisiting for “minor-common sense” National firearms restrictions.
And of course, a broader intersection of ones digital “permanent record” (education/(“mental”)health/financial/web/voting/workplace/DNA/shopping/nutritional consumption/pharmaceutical/group associations) ALL “conveniently” accessible by a mandatory National Identity Purchasing Card.
After all, it IS for the greater good ‘fer cryin’ out loud.
{/sarc}
- CaptDMO | 01/11/2011 @ 09:50
Hmmmm….oops.
National Identity Transaction Card?
- CaptDMO | 01/11/2011 @ 09:52
What they’re trying to do here, is attack on many fronts, so that every single significant event makes the movement stronger.

Someone gets shot…economy sucks…economy doing great…weather cooler, weather warmer. Through it all, the progressive movement is mightier when it’s said & done than it was the day before.

It would be completely awesome if they took care of the country with the same mindset…
- mkfreeberg | 01/11/2011 @ 10:14
Capt. DMO,

all this is yet another example of what I like to call “the Asterisk,” which is the single most potent entity in the leftist worldview. It goes like this:

Nobody is smart/good/ethical/nuanced enough to run his own life.*

*except for us.

Its the one constant in leftist “thought;” tragedies like this just get them to reveal it more clearly. Typically, you have to work at it. “I decry extremist political rhetoric,” says the leftist. “Like what?” you reply. “Like how Rush Limbaugh (etc. etc.) is always implying that Barack Obama isn’t the omnipotent god-being we know he is.” (I’m paraphrasing). “Oh,” you reply, “in that case, you must surely be upset at how the Michael Moores of the world always called George W. Bush the Chimp-in-Chief.” “Not at all!” the leftist screeches, and when you ask why, he replies, “because George W. Bush is an idiot.”

You are stupid. They are not. And if they want to run your life for you (and they do), it’s only because you’ve forced them to with your incredible rube-ish dunderheadedness. It’s for your own good, you see.

Anyone wanna bet that under the new “proactive” preventive mental health issues, believing in things like the free market is ipso facto proof of dangerous schizophrenia?
- Severian | 01/11/2011 @ 14:13
Do you ever read the foreign press — I mean the waaaay foreign — press on major American incidents? It’s a hoot. For instance, check this out, in re: the Arizona shootings:

The parties’ rank-and-file supporters handle the nuts and bolts of electoral politics — fundraising, door-knocking and the like. But they also are sources of the red-hot rhetoric that inflames passions, with right- and left-leaning talk radio, cable networks and Internet sites their outlets of choice.

Those Republican and Democratic foot soldiers may not appreciate calls from the top to tone it down, though the center of the electorate, detesting ideological warfare and wanting those in Washington to work together, certainly will….Both the left and the right hurled accusations that the other was inciting violence. The suspect’s political leanings weren’t clear.

That’s from the China Post, via a link I found on — I shit you not –the website of the North Korea Times.

Yes, even the goddamned communists have a more fair and balanced media than we do.
- Severian | 01/12/2011 @ 06:05
[…] the Left Went Nuts More Space Bond 23 Date Announced Congratulations to democrats for Higher Taxes Memo For File CXXVIII Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior On the Arizona Shooting Making of Florida One ObamaCare’s […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 01/13/2011 @ 08:50

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Memo For File CXXVIIIMonday, January 10th, 2011

Memo For File CXXVIII
Monday, January 10th, 2011