Democratic Representative Gabrielle Gifford of Arizona, continued

At some point, I have to stop following links; ending up staring in horror at therightfangirl earnestly strategizing about how to defend themselves from the liberals that will totally blame them for this or blankly watching unironic use of this tragedy to earnestly shout about gun control and political capital being amassed because yeah, this tragedy shouldn't be about the people who were actually victims for any longer than absolutely necessary. By that I mean, not at all.

I do get the fact this is probably a politically-motivated crime by someone who may or may not be mentally ill (the youtubes are--IDEK, something). Surprisingly, I'm politically and socially aware enough to realize that yeah, Palin's truly inspired use of gun rhetoric is pretty questionable and the entire rhetoric of violence currently permeating political thought is something that should have been curtailed or hell, at least acknowledged as more than extreme right wing rhetoric when the extreme right has controlled conservative thought for so long I'm not sure they even remember they used to be so much more. It's human nature to want to make sense of what goes pear-shaped and human nature to want it to be prevented. It's human nature to blame and to defend and to be really douchey in the name of politics because politics is the decider of a lot of how we live our lives. It's kind of how we even get to live our lives.

OTOH, there's a very thick and easily-visible line between political consciousness and outright douchery; it's not hard. If within five hours of the attempted assassination of a sitting United States Representative to Congress, your biggest worry is making sure those liberals don't blame you, you're a douche. If within five hours of the death of a nine year old child you're already exploding self-righteously about the evils of guns, do I need to repeat this? It's not like the spectrum of political behavior is moderate or assassin; there's a wide and surprisingly unpopulated in between that can be navigated that balances preventing future tragedies and tracing relationships between rhetoric and reality without fodderizing a woman being shot for her politics and a child dying.

Extremism is dangerous, but it's not just militias and assassinations. Moderate does not mean "Does not shoot people for opposing beliefs" or even "Does not pull a Henry II about meddlesome Democrats." That's not a standard of behavior; that's a fairly clear sign the baseline needs to change. This list does not need to be expanded.

*****

At Huffington it is reported that Representative Gifford has not yet woken up nor spoke to anyone.

In more uplifting news, Daniel Hernandez's role in Representative Gifford's survival is documented here. I'm pretty sure most college interns don't sign up with this in mind, and his actions in the wake of the shooting are everything you hope to see in someone who might one day serve the public.

Comments

[ithiliana]

Thank you for the link about Daniel Hernandez' actions!

I love your phrase about about the "line between political consciousness and outright douchery"--and agree, but sort of waver a bit. I completely agree that such treatment of human beings SHOULD not happen. Remembering the earliest assassination I saw covered on the media (President Kennedy's), it just seems inevitable.

I wish there was a way to stop it, but I don't think there is.

That is, I think it's absolutely bedrock human behavior to fit events into our existing narratives--but there are differences between what goes on in our head and what is said in our immediate circle and what is circulated online. And of course there is a huge difference between what narratives people are using, if that makes sense.

I think for far too many people (I'm writing a post about this issue), the existing narrative is "lone crazy gunman" -- but I'm seeing the other narratives circulating as well which is why, yes, I NEVER never watch mainstream media anyway, but especially not in the wake of such tragedies like this one, because the way those dominant media narratives get spun anger me so much (the last time I watched msm coverage of events was the Clarence Thomas hearings, and watching what was done to Anita Hill made me swear off ever watching any sort of televised news again). That's just my solution, and it may be a cowardly one, but the dehumanization of victims of tragedy seems inevitable in these circumstances.

There are a few places/people who are avoiding that dehumanization, and I appreciate them--as I do your post--especially linking to the story of Hernandez.

Thank you.

[seperis]

Some bloggers and news are more careful to contextualize without the dehumanization--and thank you, I couldn't quite get the word I wanted for that--but some of them didn't even try. It's not like I don't get or agree with the entire crosshairs thing, but please to be stop sounding so pleased to be proved right. We don't like the rhetoric because it can contribute to violence; no one should actually want to be proved right like this.

Daniel Hernandez was great. I get the feeling he was minimizing his involvement and glad someone got a chance to get everything about what happened; that kind of good sense after what happened is so rare, not to mention courage.

[seperis]

Here's another one:

Heroic Woman Charged Jared Loughner

I've been tearing up about this for a few minutes now.