Wednesday, January 19, 2011

George Didn't Pull the Trigger Either

While wrestling with my inability to sleep in an Olympia motel room Monday night, I watched a documentary on PBS about the life and death of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. One particular aspect of the program really caught my eye. It intersects with an issue -- violent political rhetoric -- that we are dealing with in the aftermath of the mass shooting in Tuscon.

Regardless of whether or not one believes that James Earl Ray acted alone or as part of a conspiracy, there is little question that he was a fervent segregationist.

In 1968, then Governor George C. Wallace of Alabama was making his second bid for the Democratic nomination for president. Part of Wallace's platform was extolled in violent political rhetoric aimed at demonizing blacks as an "inferior race." Wallace enjoyed quite a bit of mainstream media attention which allowed his ardent segregationist views to be on public display.

This is not to suggest that Wallace was the only public figure who promoted this hateful ideology. Strom Thurmond, Senator from South Carolina, and Jesse Helms, Senator from North Carolina (to name but two), were very strident proponents of segregation as well. But the public stage of a presidential campaign provided Wallace with a larger-than-life soapbox that reached into all corners of America.

When Martin was struck down in April 1968, no one suggested that Gov. Wallace was directly at fault. George didn't pull the trigger nor did he espouse King's assassination. While there was no direct connection between Wallace and James Earl Ray, many have pointed out that Wallace and others like him had helped to create the atmosphere that led to a lone gunmen (or a conspiratorial group) to decide to strike a blow for the segregationist cause by murdering Dr. King.

It is in this same vein that, I believe, current ultra-conservative personalities like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are responsible for creating a violent atmosphere that fed into the deranged mind of a lone gunmen in a Safeway parking lot in Tuscon, Arizona.

None of them pulled the trigger themselves nor did they directly advocate the utilization of a gun to silence Rep. Giffords, but the continued demonization of people who hold political views different from theirs has helped to provide a growing layer of legitimacy to the notion that, utilizing violence to silence some or to get what you believe is right, is justifiable.

It is from this perspective that it is immaterial whether or not Jared Loughner was a devotee of any of these right wing demagogues. Loughner may have given any of them nothing more than a passing notice. So, this is not an argument of clear cause and effect. It has far more to do with creating an environment in which the thought of violent remediation will find resonance with certain sectors of the population at large.

The old adage "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" is only true on a superficial level. Words almost always serve as the impetus for violent actions. So, when public personalities decide to employ violent phraseology as the medium by which to "sell" their message, they should not be surprised at all when some people take these notions literally and carry out heinous acts!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are unmoderated, so you can write whatever you want.