Few of
us can easily surrender our belief that society must somehow make
sense. The thought that the state has lost its mind and is punishing
so many innocent people is intolerable. And so the evidence has
to be internally denied.
~ Arthur
Miller
How convenient
for our political overseers: there has been another mass-shooting
this time at a Connecticut grade-school in which many adults
and young children were murdered. Members of the mainstream media,
politicians, and other government officials are being turned loose
to share their lack of critical thinking with a public conditioned
to await their direction. With the kind of frenzy exhibited by
a monkey that has been bitten by a scorpion, establishment sock-puppets
quickly respond with proposals to further enhance state power
while, at the same time, shrinking individual liberty. Taking
the advice of the neo-Machiavellian Rahm Emanuel that "a
crisis is a terrible thing to waste" the victims in Connecticut
will join those in the Oregon shopping mall, Columbine and Aurora,
Colorado, and elsewhere, to be exploited on behalf of disarming
Americans.
The news
coverage of this latest atrocity follows a predictable pattern:
police officers, armed soldiers, and federal FBI and ATF functionaries,
are on the scene as a reminder of the top-down system of order
that the shootings have just refuted. The mayor, state governor,
and president each holds a press conference to assure their respective
herds that all is under control, their control. In a world
in which vertically-structured institutions are collapsing into
horizontal networks, the established order is desperate to reinforce
its authority to control what it is clearly unable to do. The
mantra "we will find out what went wrong and fix it so that
it doesnt happen again" becomes less and less persuasive
to those who understand that "insanity" is exhibited
by those who keep repeating the same actions, expecting different
results.
President
Obama shed his crocodile tears for the latest group of victims.
As he began to speak, and before the president pretended to wipe
tears from his eyes, CNN informed us that "Obama Weeps Over
School Massacre": sure, just as he continues to weep over
the tens of thousands of children and other innocent victims of
his wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and any other places he might arbitrarily
choose to attack. He then spoke of the need to take "meaningful
action" to prevent such murderous acts in the future. Gosh,
I wonder what such "actions" might entail? Were he sincere
in his professed concern for the killing of children, he might
choose to reward rather than attempt to destroy
Julian Assange who used his WikiLeaks site to show videos of
American soldiers, in helicopters, machine-gunning journalists,
innocent children, and other civilians in Iraq!
Seeking to
limit the private ownership of guns is about as irrational a response
to violence as would be a proposal to eliminate the private ownership
of cars in order to prevent the deaths of tens of thousands of
people who are killed annually in auto accidents. The LA Times
informs us that, on the same day as the Connecticut shootings,
a man in China attacked twenty-two schoolchildren and an adult
with a knife, an occurrence that "was reminiscent of a spate
of knife attacks on schoolchildren that took place across China
in 2010." The same news story informs us that a young man
had been arrested following the box-cutter slashing of a number
of young women on a subway. The report ends with a reference to
Chinas stringent gun-control laws.
Should these
events engender restrictions on knife-ownership? And what about
those who might resort to golf clubs, baseball bats, or pipe-wrenches
to carry out their murderous intentions? Of course, it is a public
armed with more powerful weapons ones that would allow people
to defend themselves against state weaponry that troubles the
statists. Dead children are but convenient victims to be exploited
by the shedders of faux tears in an effort to further weaken the
defenses of ordinary people.
I could offer
my own "solution" to the mass killings with which the
media entertains us: these shootings tend to take place within
the confines of institutions and other large organizations. Government
schools and universities, corporate businesses, churches, shopping
malls, among other systems reflect what Leopold Kohr called the
"size theory of social misery." Perhaps, drawing upon
work done in the study of "chaos," it could be said
that large organizations are "attractors" for violent
activity; that we ought to be focusing our attentions on reducing
the size of our social systems.
While I agree
with such a systemic analysis of events in our world, it does
not go deeply enough to explain the source of our difficulties.
Like so much of our confusion, we focus attention on the consequences
of our behavior, rather than upon such causal factors
as the thinking that produces dysfunctional results. To
continue going deeper for explanations for our troublesome conduct
leads us, eventually, into the depths of our own understanding;
into how we lead lives conditioned by those who would benefit
from our having subservient minds. To such depths most of us fear
to go, and so we settle for superficial explanations: guns, rock
music, violent films, illegal drugs, television, produce the conflict
and disorder in our lives! Such thinking presumes that we are
little more than mechanisms upon which the inanimate world exercises
its free will! The idea that "things" can cause
us to act in ways we are unable to resist is a reversion to the
kind of childhood thinking that sees power in our toys, blankets,
and other material things. But it is precisely to that level of
childish thinking to which we must be reduced if we are to remain
subject to institutional domination!
Most of us
are uncomfortable thinking beyond the infantile mindset that allows
us to avoid the responsibility for our own actions. Our parents
or, in the case of political functionaries, our super-parents
will gladly bear this burden for us, in exchange for our obedience
to their most arbitrary decisions. The distress that arises from
the movement of thought within our minds is too much for most
of us to tolerate. In a world of politically-defined "entitlements,"
we accept the implicit assumption that we deserve an unburdened
and comforted mind; that the conflicts, contradictions, and dehumanized
consequences of our thinking cannot be traced back to us; and
that politicians and media gurus will "weep" for us
or pretend to do so so that we need not experience the insanity
of a roomful of dead five-year old children whose deaths were
caused not by some twisted sense of responsibility found
in guns, but by patterns of thought we insist on embracing!
As is the case for so much of the normal neurosis of our culture,
let us seek explanations in places other than the site we wish
to avoid.
Most of us
live lives that worship and are entertained by the systematic
violence and destruction of others. What video games do not condition
the minds of young people to rapidly push buttons that kill an
endless supply of "enemies?" How many motion pictures
embrace peace and love as themes, while the noisiest and bloodiest
films abound? How many parents dress their children as well
as themselves in the popular style of battlefield camouflage?
What are children expected to learn from this ubiquitous celebration
of the organized killing of those identified, by political authorities,
as "the enemy?" What is the lesson to be derived from
bumper-stickers that read "support the troops
war;" or the mob-like booing by make-believe Christians
of a Ron Paul who dared to suggest that America pursue a foreign
policy based on Jesus "golden rule?"
The day following
this latest atrocity, media babblers began to inquire: "what
could have motivated this young man?" While some reports
inform us that this man like so many previous mass-killers
was on prescribed psychotropic drugs that often produce violent
and suicidal responses little attention was focused on this
fact. Such drugs are part of the arsenal with which the institutional
order seeks to control its herd, and any mention of their adverse
effects is thus to be avoided in seeking explanations. Not to
upset the passive mindset of their viewers something media employers
insist upon as a condition of employment the usual causal suspects
will be dragged out for blame. But it is not in guns, motion pictures,
video-games, or bumper-stickers that explanations are to be found.
All of these things objects lacking in will are nothing more
than expressions of the purposes and values to be found within
our own minds. It is our thinking that generates demands
for such things, and it is to our thinking that we must repair
if we are truly desirous of ending our participation in the madness
of our world.
A
news report that followed the recent shooting at an Oregon shopping
mall informed us that the killer had long desired a career in
the Marines. The after-effects of a broken foot, however, disqualified
him from the Marine Corps, a situation that made him quite angry.
Somewhere in his youth, he apparently envisioned himself a participant
in this vicious, life-destroying agency of the state. What learning
and from what sources helped influence such thinking on his
part? Being unable to join would-be comrades in the indiscriminate
killing of strangers in the Middle East, did he decide to take
out his anger upon other unknown persons at a shopping mall? Is
there any intelligent mind that is prepared to argue that guns
made him do what he did?
If for no
other reason than the safety of their children, I suspect that
the atrocities that occurred in Connecticut will lead many parents
to take their children out of government schools which are often
the targets of such attacks and enroll them in private schools
or participate in the growing homeschooling movement. Such a move,
by itself, will not end our institutionalized violence, but it
may provide an environment in which ones child is less likely
to become either a victim or a perpetrator of such
insane acts as occurred in Connecticut.
The only
solution to the collective madness of our world lies in the processes
of individuation. Carl Jung made the point as explicitly
as can be stated: "if the individual is not truly regenerated
in spirit, society cannot be either, for society is the sum total
of individuals in need of redemption." It is neither politicians,
media voices with their make-believe expressions of grief, nor
self-styled "experts" seeking "consolation"
or "closure" that can restore our social sanity, but
our individual selves you and I walking away from the mindless
masses through which the established order pursues its ends while
destroying our children.