Politicise this tragedy

P. Z. Myers tells us what he really thinks about the Arizona murders and their larger political implications:

What we have here is an attempted assassination of a politician by an insane crank at a political event, in a state where the political discourse has been an unrelenting howl of eliminationist rhetoric and characterization of anyone to the left of Genghis Khan as a traitor and enemy of the state…and now, when six (including a nine year old girl) lie dead and another fourteen are wounded, now suddenly we’re concerned that it is rude and politicizing a tragedy to point out that the right wing has produced a toxic atmosphere that pollutes our politics with hatred and the rhetoric of violence?

Screw that. Now is the time to politicize the hell out of this situation. The people who are complaining are a mix of lefty marshmallows whose first reaction to the fulfillment of right-wing fantasies by a lunatic is to drop to their knees and beg forgiveness for thinking ill of people who paint bullseyes on their political opponents, and right wing cowards who are racing to their usual tactic of attacking their critics to shame them into silence. This is NOT the time to back down and suddenly find it embarrassing to point out that right-wing pundits make a living as professional goads to insanity.

White violence is always exceptional

Of course the attempted murder of congresswoman Gifford and the very real murder of the six people who did die is not an act of political violence, let alone terrorism white rightwing violence is always exceptional, an unfortunate incident, the act of a mentally ill person with no need to be put into context:

Palin and her penis envy
It is a common phenomenon, long studied and explained by social psychology that when individuals from our in-group or privileged individuals commit questionable acts, these acts are explained individually. When individuals from out-groups, or groups that are socially unpopular, commit questionable acts, these acts are explained as part of group membership, as categorical. The former are exceptions, the latter are representative. That is how racial and ethnic prejudice persist and how white privilege is preserved. One only has to imagine what media discourse would be, had the shooter been non-White, Latino or Muslim.

So, this timeline is one of white, domestic terrorism, fueled by seditious rhetoric from various media outlets and figures. The fact that the perpetrators are not part of a single organization does not change that fact. Social movements can exist without social movement organizations.

As for mental illness, it is the easy individual culprit, the one factor that, without further elaboration, explains everything. This is as if mental illness existed in a social and cultural vacuum, which it does not, of course. To invoke mental illness may explain outrageous behavior (i.e. behavior outside of the norms) but it does not explain the commission of specific acts (assassination attempt against a Democratic Congresswoman, that still remains to be explained). But to invoke mental illness provides some relief that we are not dealing with organized violence and that therefore, there is nothing socially and politically significant going on and no deep questioning to be had.

TSA screeners do not want to touch your junk either

“Molester, pervert, disgusting, an embarrassment, creep. These are all words I have heard today at work describing me, said in my presence as I patted passengers down. These comments are painful and demoralizing, one day is bad enough, but I have to come back tomorrow, the next day and the day after that to keep hearing these comments. If something doesn’t change in the next two weeks I don’t know how much longer I can withstand this taunting. I go home and I cry. I am serving my country, I should not have to go home and cry after a day of honorably serving my country.”

Just one quote from TSA airport screeners not happy with the new patdown rules. It turns out your average security guard does not want to touch other people’s junk for eight hours a day, the occasional pervert excepted, nor likes it when travellers get upset with them for having to do so. The comments thread gets a bit overboard, nazi comparisons flying fast and loose, so be careful.

QotD: car and train people

Amanda Marcotte contemplates the symbolism behind the reluctance of new Republican governors to take federal money for train projects:

The symbol of modern conservatism is the SUV that pulls in and out of the garage of the front yard-free McMansion placed inside a gated community, a perfect little system that allows the conservative base voter to leave their home and run errands with an absolute minimum of contact with the outside world. Trains are basically the opposite of that—everyone buys a ticket (which may involve pressing “1” for English), and you sit down basically wherever, and anyone can sit in your car or even your aisle. If SUVs are the symbols of everything wrong with conservative America to liberals, then trains are definitely a symbol of everything wrong with liberal America to conservatives—the egalitarian nature of them, the prioritizing of fuel efficiency over living like a little pretend king in a little pretend castle, the lack of airs that are associated with train travel. Once the trains come in, it becomes easier not to own a car, and next thing you know, people are walking more, which means even more shoulder-rubbing with the hoi polloi. It’s all very disconcerting. No wonder Republican politicians want nothing to do with it.