When Passion Becomes Obsession

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Yesterday, this country suffered another mass shooting.  A gunman opened fire on Republican members of Congress who were practicing for a charity baseball game.  Several attendees were injured, including Representative Steve Scalise.

We’ve had a shooting per month so far this year.  Every perpetrator has been the focus of intense investigations.  The assumption is that they are all mentally unstable.  No stable human being kills another, right?  In this case, the gunman was a political activist.  He was unhappy with our President and members of the Republican Party.  He acted like many of us who are passionate about politics.  He wrote letters to the editor.  He voiced his concerns to his representatives.  He supported his favorite candidate by volunteering to work for the campaign.  Yet somehow it wasn’t enough.  One wonders what line of logic made him conclude that the only possible solution was to shoot innocent people.

As the investigators delve more into his history, they’ve found that the gunman had anger issues, but nothing to make anyone think that he would take his preoccupation this far.  There have been numerous statements by members of both parties blaming the other side for the rhetoric that has become so volatile.  Can rhetoric alone be to blame?

The man staked out the YMCA for two months before the incident.  He lived out of his car and gym bag during this time period.  He watched and waited.  He cancelled his membership the day before the shooting.  This doesn’t appear to be an act of passion, but a cold, calculated planned assault.  He was no longer the passionate political activist.  He had become a man obsessed.

So while there has been plenty of blame to be passed around, we have to take a hard look at the atmosphere that lead up to this shooting.

This election cycle has been the most vicious, the most divisive that I have ever seen.  The malicious language, the name calling, and the slurs came hot and heavy.  Both parties painted the other as evil and unfit to lead.  Every word, every sound bite was analyzed, escalated and regurgitated.  People reported feeling anxious.  Can you blame them?

The twenty-four/seven news cycle has created an insatiable demand for sound bites.  The advent of social media has increased this exponentially.  So now the networks are competing for clicks, as well.  Click bait headlines on Facebook and Twitter are often misleading or provocative.  The public often take them at face value rather than clicking on the link and reading the attached articles.  Although I don’t believe networks like CNN are “fake news,” there are fake news organizations.  These sites spew out specious, purposely misleading reports.  It is difficult to tell what is real anymore and this confusion adds to the unease.

Perhaps the worst offender is the public, the people we see every day on social media.  Social media can be a great place to discuss politics, but it has disintegrated into hate filled forums.  People now have a strong emotional investment in their political parties.  They are unwilling to listen and debate as adults.  The conversations degenerate into hate filled dialogues.  As a result, everyone feels invalidated.

Individuals like yesterday’s shooter are marginalized.  This vitriol fans the flames of their anxieties and insecurities.  They believe their voices are being intentionally ignored and rationalize that what they do is the only way they will be heard.

So is there a solution?  I don’t have the answers.  I do know that this country cannot survive another election like the last one.  I know that there will always be people who are on the edges of society, either by mental illness or isolation.  And we all know that the networks won’t be changing their financial model anytime soon.

Wolf Blitzer interviewed Jane Sanders, the wife of Senator Bernie Sanders, about this topic today.  Blitzer showed a clip of Senator Sanders calling President Trump, “the worst and most dangerous president in the history of our country.”  Blitzer asked if Sanders had gone too far.  .  Mrs. Sanders emphasized that placing comments in context is important.  She blamed the media for fanning the flames.  Short sound bites don’t reflect the overall intent of the speaker.

Should the inflammatory rhetoric stop? Yes, but so does the finger pointing.  The media’s responsibility is to report and often what they report is incendiary.  When a political figure makes a strong statement, it is their job to relay it, but it does need to be placed in in context.

In turn, our nation’s governmental representatives need to dial it back.  In the interview, Jane Sanders made an excellent point.  She recommended that issues should be discussed without demonizing the opponent.  This applies to all of us.  Too many times we get caught up in the moment.  We spend way too much time on social media (and yes, as a blogger I see the irony in that statement.)  As a result, we make these topics an integral part of our day.  Passion and energy have their place in the political process, but we shouldn’t lose perspective.

So what can we do?  We need to spend less time on social media. We need to be scrupulous in what we read and not take everything at face value.  We can stop reacting to anyone who holds a different view than our own and when we choose to join a conversation we should do so in a responsible manner.  If the other party does not act in the same fashion, walk away.  It isn’t worth it.

The rhetoric has got to stop and it has to start with us.