eloquent. celebrating someone's death is base, but oddly forgivable in some cases for its relative honesty. the people who "abhor violence" and appeal to some imagined sense of shame always seem insincere to me. as though affecting disgust could elevate them above something they are mostly both incapable of and at the mercy of.
there's a reflexive self-serving lie some people reach for when they "condemn violence," and I think it reveals a deceptive instinct. they have no problem with it being done on their behalf and for much lesser offenses. I guess if there's one thing reasoning with violence cures you of it's sanctimony.
what the effect of the killing of this CEO (literally, a symbol, his job is all anyone remembers about him) more closely resembles is the idea of a Girardian scapegoat, where the tensions in the society are so unresolvable, it's going to start sacrificing individuals to let off the tension so it can cohere again. that's about as american and human as it gets. six weeks ago the US was on the edge of a civil war. today, less so. it's sad for the guys family, but maybe there is comfort for them in the sheer randomness of it. to me the killer and his manifesto are not meaningful. the popular hatred of the insurance business is not meaningful. they are as random as a car crash, a robbery, or a stroke.
I'm saying that affecting outrage or shock at violence is as morally culpable as celebrating the death of a stranger, because they both reveal a latent weakness and lack compassion or fortitude.
there's a reflexive self-serving lie some people reach for when they "condemn violence," and I think it reveals a deceptive instinct. they have no problem with it being done on their behalf and for much lesser offenses. I guess if there's one thing reasoning with violence cures you of it's sanctimony.
what the effect of the killing of this CEO (literally, a symbol, his job is all anyone remembers about him) more closely resembles is the idea of a Girardian scapegoat, where the tensions in the society are so unresolvable, it's going to start sacrificing individuals to let off the tension so it can cohere again. that's about as american and human as it gets. six weeks ago the US was on the edge of a civil war. today, less so. it's sad for the guys family, but maybe there is comfort for them in the sheer randomness of it. to me the killer and his manifesto are not meaningful. the popular hatred of the insurance business is not meaningful. they are as random as a car crash, a robbery, or a stroke.
I'm saying that affecting outrage or shock at violence is as morally culpable as celebrating the death of a stranger, because they both reveal a latent weakness and lack compassion or fortitude.