« Crisis of trust. | tpmgary's Blog | GOP American Energy Act--pay no attention to that carbon dioxide. »
When it comes to hate crimes, there's no such thing as "acting alone".
Hate speech and hate crimes are sociological, not just psychological. It's ridiculous to look at one of these crimes from the shortened perspective of the point of the gun to the victim. It's much bigger than that. That's why I think it's a misconception to conclude any racist who takes someone's life "acted alone" or is "a lone wolf".
I hear this repeated in the media over and over again and it's just anti-intelligent. Even if James Von Brunn, the self-proclaimed white supremacist who walked into the Holocaust Museum today and killed a guard was not accompanied by others with guns, or doesn't appear to be part of a planned larger conspiracy to commit violence, he's part of a society in which hatred is brewed daily.
You don't have to be holding a gun to be an integral part of the racist mob mentality that drives one person or several people to commit hate crimes.
Murder is only one result of terror. There are no lone wolves when it comes to terror.
It's bigger. The origins of a hate crime should be viewed as an integral part of an actual hate crime. We can't just look at the final act of a terror play.
Instigation is critical here. We need to make a serious assessment of those who disguise their hate speech as free speech.
It's all connected.
Advertisement
And their penchant for acting in groups just proves your words right. As a matter of course, these people are cowards who would never act alone. They received their marching orders from someone-- even if the trail is convoluted.
June 11, 2009 12:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are right on here.
I get sick and tired of the belief that there are "crazies" out there who do awful things. The reality is that they are part of the whole of us, steeped in the same ideologies that make up the values, and every day explanations that keep us in our places - and unquestioning. Are they moved to the extreme end? Yes. Can the masses be moved to the extreme? You better believe it. Can policy be seen as providing tacit approval to those who are moved to action? It certainly can - and has - and will again.
June 11, 2009 12:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is always the 'lone gun man', the crazy guy, the 'few bad apples'. You do not have to be an assassination nut to know that there are usually more variables involved.
We know that the torture issue had more people involved than a 'few bad apples', just as we know that Tim McVeigh was a member of a hate group or hate groups.
The 88 year old today, I doubt others were directly involved. But his hate threads were followed and he received positive reinforcement for his psychotic beliefs.
Good post. Makes me think.
June 11, 2009 1:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was kind of surprised that an 88 yr. old did this. When I think it through, I guess he's had his whole life to build up his hate. But why did he act now?
June 11, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
He's been this way all his life. He was probably taught to hate by his parents.
He fought in WWII but was anti Semetic. What's wrong with that picture? You join the military to fight against the country who you smpathize with? For all we know he could have been spying for Germany!
That is twisted. Could he not have informed the military how he felt?
June 11, 2009 1:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hate can be taught, you're right about that. I was watching a National Geographic special on the neo-nazi movement in America. The Nationalist Socialist Movement. They were demonstrating in DC. Startling to see children wearing Swastikas.
June 11, 2009 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
The most dangerous thing for a truly fringe wingnut to feel is that their beliefs are shared by a large population. That is what some on Fox News and conservative talk radio have provided! They have provided the truly Far-Far-Right crazies with the wonderful feeling of "I'm not alone in these crazy thoughts".
I know a man who is an ultra conservative Catholic. So much so that he would love to see a theocratic state for Catholics; but at the same time he starts any conversation about religion with "I know not many people think the way I do". He is aware that he is on the fringe and doesn't expect others to conform to his beliefs.
Rush was talking earlier in the day yesterday (the day of the shooting) again stating that Obama has no Birth Certificate. I know that these comments by Rush didn't cause the shooting; I'm not stupid... but it's just a great example of idiotic rhetoric that gives comfort to the loony fringe who are likely to carry out such horrific crimes against our society.
June 11, 2009 8:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, if the biggest cable news channel and the biggest radio host are with you, how wrong can you be?!
June 11, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, to you and me, if Fox and the right-wing radiovangelists are with you, how right can you be?
June 11, 2009 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Love triumphs over hate, but only with blood, sweat, tears, and prayers.
The blood was shed yesterday by Stephen T. Johns, an heroic public servant who acted on our behalf. He wasn't the first, will not be the last, to sacrifice his life for the preservation and extension of human dignity.
The sweat will roll off the brows and backs of diligent people whose works of love proactively defend our nation against acts of hate and perdition.
The tears will be shed at officer Johns' funeral. They are not the first or last to fall; their river of grief will propel our resolve to continue the struggle against human indecency and cruelty.
The prayers.
What say ye on this one? As for me, I'm a Christian, and believe, according to God's revealed word, that love and truth will ultimately prevail over hate and deception.
Our parents' generation ran those Nazi types into the ground back in '45. We'll do it again if we have to. Are you ready for the contest?
Carey Rowland, author of Glass half-Full
June 11, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed! Excellent post!
I think, in part, we are in the midst of a process that, while painful, will ultimately see our nation emerge stronger and as a more unified people. It's as though developments in the modern world are bringing this crazed reaction to the surface.
The right wing cooks are striking out because they fear the progress that is being made in society and they feel threatened by it. It's almost like an excorcism in that once the demon is confronted then it lashes out furiously to scare and bully those driving it out of the host so they will go away and let the demon continue to exist. But the excorcists in this case are the vast majority of Americans who have rejected the world view of the Von Brunn's and other crazed, violent wingnuts. They continue to be dangerous and sadly they are likely to continue to lash out violently but they are in their last throws, because in part they are right. Their kind, their caveman point of view, particularly the insane racial superiority of whites stuff is diminishing daily. In the greater scheme of things they have already been defeated and they know it. Hopefully, society will be able to figure out how to contain their feverish violence so that their last gasps cause minimal harm to others.
June 11, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You need to be very careful how you use words.
Did this man mentally belong to a group of people that think the same way?
Yes.
Was what he did part of a "conspiracy"?
No.
An while it is true there are many racists this man did indeed "act alone".
And just how would you punish all his accomplices, since no one is a "lone wolf"?
Should we fill the jails for thinking ?
Or maybe 10 years for speaking??
Please try to be rational.
People DO act alone.
Everyone has influences on their lives.
That's why its proper to have laws that punish the action and not the thought or the words.
Next thing you know these types might take over your town and you'll find yourself in jail for thinking.. well, whatever they choose to make a crime.
June 11, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jade, I don't advocate putting people in jail for thinking or speaking.
I overtly make the distinction between hate speech and free speech.
As I said in my post, I think a lot of hate speech is posing as free speech. And maybe we should look at that more carefully.
The point of my post is that when the media rushes to say a racist who commits a hate crime "acted alone", in my opinion, it too easily dismisses the impact of the sociological factors that helped shape the act of a hate crime.
I think we should better assess the relationship between hate speech and hate crime.
June 11, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
So do I. But I'd be willing to bet my definition of both is, by degrees, different than your's - and from everyone else's on earth. One person's hate speech is another person's legitimate discourse.
June 11, 2009 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
fair enough.
But then, one person's hate crime is another person's legitimate recourse.
June 11, 2009 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
And that other person ends up in jail - or face a punishment more final - should he or she exercise that "legitimate recourse". Up to now, thankfully, "hate speech" isn't so penalized.
June 12, 2009 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
My opinion is that the 1st amendment should protect as much speech as possible, even hateful speech. The question of whether the Von Brunn's of the world truly "act alone" is not a legal one, its a moral one.
June 11, 2009 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a moral one that has serious sociological consequence. I think we underestimate the correlation between hate speech and hate crime. I think it's misleading for us to use rhetoric like he "acted alone" for this very reason.
If someone is raped and there are others around who cheer it on, is the only one guilty the person who committed the rape? Would you say that person, in this situation, acted alone?
June 11, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
These lone-wolf killers give the word "lynch mob" a bad name. (h/t the Simpsons)
June 11, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink