For our next meeting, we will cover the mass shooting in Pittsburg and its impact on the upcoming election. Here is the first video:
Here are the other videos shown at the meeting:
- Trump pays respects in Pittsburgh
- HIAS Responds to Synagogue Massacre
- Debunking the myths surrounding George Soros
- Peak Florida
The word “Talmud” is a Hebrew word meaning “learning, instruction.” The Talmud is a central text of mainstream Judaism and consists primarily of discussions and commentary on Jewish history, law (especially its practical application to life), customs and culture."
ReplyDelete"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief.
Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now.
You are not obligated to complete the work,
But neither are you free to abandon it.”
What do we make of mass shootings, and what might be the political consequences of this particular evil in Pittsburgh? Answer to the first question may require the long view of human experience, but in taking the long view we may also gain some insight into its short-term political consequences. Here are some thoughts that might add to the discussion.
ReplyDeleteFor as long as human beings have been aware of the inevitability of death they have created narratives to deal with its implications. Death awareness introduces the possibility that life is without meaning and that we are no more significant in the vast universe than cosmic dust. Obviously, people are not generally comfortable with this prospect, hence the creation of a narrative that places them and their kind at the center of the universe and places all “others” in the category of threat, since their narrative is obviously not going to have “us” at its center. (Of course, to believers the narrative is provided by a higher power.)
As long as communities were small and could avoid one another, conflict between narratives was minimal. However, as civilizations came along, conflicts grew into wars over material resources, but these wars were and are typically supported by some underlying life-sustaining narrative – a myth, religion, ideology, etc. Furthermore, for some time societies have been so large and heterogeneous that maintaining a common narrative, not only between societies but within them, has been somewhat problematic, and the potential for conflict has multiplied as a result. What life-sustaining story will suffice to hold a diverse nation together? (The Founding Fathers had one, but it was built on the exclusion of everyone but white property owners and the denial of humanity to a large swath of the population.)
In the absence of a plausible all-encompassing narrative, people are free to pick and choose, or even make up their own, and in doing so create life-threatening enemies all around. Fortunately, most of us are able to reconcile our own views with the larger community, but some are not. So they target some group as the primary threat to their own significance and seek their destruction in the false belief that, in the end, they will stand up, survey the the carnage, smile, and live happily ever after. Of course, that never happens and never will, a reality that only heightens the anxiety.
Given the ease of communication today, people can readily find or form groups of the like-minded and just as easily identify outside threats – immigrants, a racial or ethnic group, an ideology, a political party, a gender, a sexual orientation, etc. Along with this ease of identifying with and coalescing around a common narrative, (i.e., a mortality defense), we have an administration now that owes its success to exploiting this very process. Rather than trying to identify a common narrative to truly improve the lot of all of citizens, Trump has exploited a particular narrative (apparently one held by about a third of the population and Fox News) that can only lead to further conflict. Given that his political survival is dependent on promoting a narrative of exclusion, and that this narrative is perceived to be life-sustaining by many in his base, tragedies like the murders in Pittsburgh are challenged in their capacity for generating long-term unity. Some will no doubt come together, but many groups will place their own spin on such events to reinforce their own narrative to the exclusion of all others, and the outcome of the elections will be determined less by who changes their mind than by who shows up.