Connecticut

Water Cooler
#21

Yeah I agree Turd. So it could be more widely available media leading to unfavorable comparisons combined with a declining sense of value on an individual level – two factors that converge as part of the explanation for the increase in mass violence. It’s hard to argue that current popular culture doesn’t systematically devalue the average person. What’s weird about that is that in order for popular culture to exist, by definition, people have to choose to actively participate in and support the furtherance of that culture (e.g., Jersey Shore wouldn’t exist if everyone chose not to watch it).

I’ve been saying for a while that I think these kind of mass killings will unfortunately increase in frequency. Although the exact cause of the increased rate of violence is hard to pin point, it’s hard to see why any of the factors that may be contributing would suddenly reverse. In this case the trend is not your friend :confused:

#22

you need to take a step back and look around you. you’re stuck in the details of how an economy is organized when I’m talking about the philosophical underpinnings of alternative systems. the economic system of collectivism only has to do with school shootings insofar as it is based on a philosphy where more school shootings is to be expected.

#23

I still read your syllogism as

–

A. Collectivism is bad.

B. School shootings are bad.

C. Therefore school shootings come from the philosophy that underlies collectivism.

Even to the extent that collectivism and school shootings come from the same underlying philosophy (i.e. A and B are both caused by a common underlying philosophy P), we should still see more shootings (or poisonings, knifings, general violence) in societies that are more collectivist (particularly moderate collectivism, like Sweden, France, and Germany, vs extreme collectivism like North Korea).

In fact we don’t see this.

The arguement doesn’t hold water.

I agree (note: I am agreeing with you here) that when people feel a need to compare themselves to each other to feel valued and happy and find themselves comparing themselves to the entire world because of the internet and media, they are more likely to feel like failures, therefore desperate, and therefore might be more likely to turn to violence to say “Here I am, don’t ignore me.” I’m going out in a blaze of glory so I will be remembered for something!

But, ironically, this means that developing more social ties with friends and peers in their local community is actually *more* important than the kind of rampant individualism that underlies the philosophies that you like. In some ways, a more collectivist approach, where people are more likely to feel part of a team and a community may help reduce this kind of thing.

I don’t want to see that overdone as a justification for an overly invasive state, but I do think that for this particular issue, the philosophies that undergird collectivism probably help more than they hurt.

And that would also have the advantage of fitting the empirical evidence.

#24

I should add that when comparing philosophies and implementations, it is never fair to compare an idealized philosophy with a concrete realization of another philosophy.

You can compare idealized libertarianism with idealized socialism.

You can compare realized libertarianism with realized socialism.

You can compare realized libertarianism with idealized libertarianism.

You can compare realized socialism with idealized socialism.

But you can’t effectively compare realized socialism with idealized libertarianism

Nor can you compare realized libertariansim with idealized socialism.

In practice, sometimes we have no choice but to try to compare a real system with an idealized alternative, but it is very hard to come up with defensible conclusions about what would be like, because it is too easy to imagine away (or imagine in) problems on the idealized leg.

So you can compare the real with the real.

Or the ideal with the ideal

Or the ideal of a philosophy with the realized version of the same philosophy.

But you can’t fairly compare a realized version of a philosophy with an idealized version of another philosophy (or at least you should recognize that the results of that comparison are extremely unreliable).

#25

I definitely believe that the “cult of celebrity” is the major culprit. Basically all of the US has been drawn into this cult and watches that latest famous people 24/7, which could be some guy with a stupid internet meme or a hollywood starlet self-destructing. Tell somebody that you met Rachel McAdams at a bar and they’re as interested as if you said you’re the mayor of the city. The cult of celebrity glorifies the famous and scorns the ordinary. People who don’t bring much to the table but who’ve been told they’re special their whole lives become extremely frustrated when they find out (in their early 20s) that their life is, in their view, a dead end. They will do anything to be famous.

So, they decide to go on a shooting spree to A) lash out at the world that scorned them because they’re not going to be billionaire celebrity business typcoons and B) become relevant in the cult of celebrity, i.e. famous. As bchad said, each previous massacre requires the next massacre to be larger in order to achieve objective B: join the cult of celebrity and have that persons life “mean” something. This is something that basically anybody can do, as long as they are desensitized to killing and place no value on human life. Constant media overload has blurred the lines between reality and fiction and many people are desensitized.

“We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won’t. And we’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off.”

  • Fight Club
#26

The degree of hate you need to do that is hard to understand. Just yesterday my wife and I went to a festival at our daughter’s kindergarten, and you see how happy and innocent children are at that age. It’s so sad.

On top of instant 24/7 news, endless coverage, etc., the Internet allows people about to explode to reinforce their beliefs by their own self-confirmation bias. If somebody is considering such a heinous act as today’s events, he could find an e-crowd (forum, or social network) where people justify his sick rationale or agenda; therefore the guy on the edge might think he’s not that lunatic after all if dozens of people agree with him to some extent, or at least claim to do so on the Internet. E.g., the Norwegian mass murder.

#27

Personally, I don’t really have an opinion on why this stuff seems to happen until we get a decent idea of this guy’s motives. I understand (don’t agree with, but understand why it happens) religious, or idelogical violence like in Beslan or Srebrenica, but things like this and VTech, I can’t really wrap my head around.

I don’t think you can really draw society wide conclusions on things like the Aurora shooting. Are mental illnesses driven by isolation and depression on the rise? Seriously, wtf was that?

Also can we not discuss stupidity like libertarianism on this thread?

#28

Socioeconomic trends like these are usually decades in the making and no panacea exists that can address the root causes with immediate effect.Masking the symptoms and weakning the feedback loop between cause and symptom may be the most realistic approach to controlling outbursts in the short term. To that extent, gun control via policy adjustments, while completely ineffective against the root causes of violent outbursts, makes more sense than expecting a sudden euphoric rejection of ‘collectivist baggage’ or an equally rapid adoption of Randian ideas.

I don’t know whether these incidents constitute a long term trend. I am not even sure i know the definition of a long term trend or whether it is ultimately a useful distinction. Does behaviour suddenly become a long term trend when enough short term outbursts occur over a relatively short time frame or are we talking about gradual escalation over a wider time frame or what?

Historically,violent outbursts and fascist mentalities are swept to the fore when macroeconomic and political polarities tear a hole between the haves and the have-nots of a complex society. Record high unemployment,underemployment,increased competition that comes with labour mobility and surplus of skilled labour, a sense of unfair treatment in favour of the rich, a loss of purpose for the young, an ever widening schism between the rich and the poor all seem to correlate with radicalisation.

I agree with the points made about the media and how technology may sometimes, quite ironically, isolate people by bringing them closer together and making fringe elements realise how far from the social average they actually are. Technological improvememnts,freedom of speech and an almost vicious attitude towards self expression often allows extreme behaviour to go unnoticed or easily justified. This always-on media is often described as a mirror held up to the very people that look into it. To that extent, it is quite telling that major news agencies,which used to fulfill the role of a public service provider,are increasingly subsumed under the corporate arm of an organisation.

As to TurdFergies false syllogism regarding collectivism and violent/irrational behaviour…i am frankly a bit bored by it. To me, collectivism is as natural and necessary as lies are in any complex society. Much more sensible to realise this as necessity (necessary evil or necessary good is up to you) and control it, than to extrapolate Randian principles that may loosely work on an individual basis, to the level of a complex society.

#29

US society is in a “bad mood” in general. Politics are fractured and the economy is bad. This increases the percentage of people who are frustrated and depressed. The guy who shot people outside the NY office building had been recently laid off. I bet alcoholism, smoking, and suicides are also higher in 2012 than in 2006. Depression is a kind of mental illness. Even if you don’t want to categorize it that way, you can probably agree that some combination of factors is required to spark a violence spree: for instance depressed + unstable. More unhappy people means more people will fall into the “likely violent” category.

The copycat thing is probably part of the problem also.

There are probably other issues, including possible long term trends. However, philosophical decline in the value of human life is unlikely to be observable within 3-5 year time frames, which is probably how long we are drawing our memory from.

#30

There has definitely been a spike in (mass) violence in 2012. And this is probably attributable to short term and maybe temporary factors. However, as people above have pointed out, we don’t really have enough information to establish a long term trend.

#31

I bet there is a correlation between these shooters and virginity/social life. I’d be shocked if any of these men have ever had sexual intercourse. For the most part they’re in their mid 20s living in their mother’s basement. All these shooters are male. Has anyone mentioned that yet? When you reach your 20s and have never been with a woman or have no friends, a man goes nuts. I think by 25 the person realizes his life won’t be any better for the rest of his life and is bitter about it. Killing himself would only affect his small entourage. He wants the world to feel his pain. The class loser that was ignored his entire life now gets a chance to make a name for himself.

He kills two birds with one stone: ends his sorry life while knowing he will receive the attention he never got. Those that don’t kill themselves get the attention they always craved. 10 years ago you wouldn’t have gotten the attention you get now.

#32

The aurora guy had a gf, a few mos before. Now, I don’t think your argument is without merit, but which girl would date some crazy psychodude?

#33

Maybe the guys who go nuts have a higher probability of having no girlfriend and being a virgin or quasi-virgin, but which way the causality goes is hard to say. Perhaps he’s got no girl and no friends because he comes across as a psychopath, and women and men simply know enough to stay away from him.

Then again, I’ve seen some women with some pretty strange guys, so who knows.

A friend of mine told me last weekend that she knew this guy in Brooklyn who had killed three or four shop owners. She said “yeah, I used to go out and dance salsa with him all the time. He was so nice, a real gentleman. I was so surprised when he turned out to be a serial killer.”

The world is sure a strange place, man!

#34

The way I see the world.

There are only four ‘legitimate/understandable’ reasons to kill someone.

  1. They disrespect you

  2. They step out with your old lady/man

  3. They owe you money

  4. They threaten you or someone you care about

This shit I just don’t understand, its some coward bug ward shit. And it makes me extremely angry, which is unusual because I typically don’t get angry.

I also strongly agree with the points regarding the vapid materialism of our culture and emphasis on extrenally driven senses of self worth/happiness. It’s actually one of the key reasons I became a buddhist.

#35

I’ve noticed a lot of women love their man to be a bad a$$ in public, but a teddy bear in private when alone with her. It creates the perfect balance they say.

#36

As a 23 year old CWP holder in my home state, I now live 30 min away from where this happened, I am torn. Should a gun be brought into a taxpayer funded building its an automatic felony, which results in never being able to own a gun or live in a home with a gun owner. So there goes the pro gun arguement. And any right minded CWP holder would have to make the tough decision to open fire with young kids running around. Same goes for Colorado which is a very pro gun state. Id find it hard to believe that a CWP holder would open fire in a dark chaotic movie theatre, to a monster in body armor.

There isnt a law on the books or not on the books that could prevent something like this. People will get guns. For example Chicago, which has one of the highest murder rates but most strict gun laws.

At the end of the day its our society. Our generation has the opportunity to write the history books and we are throwing up all over ourselves (bad expression, I know.) We now grow up in far more single family households, we watch honey hoe hoe, our SAT scores are at an all time low, and political rhetoric pits one person against another.

For the first time we are going to provide worse for the next generation than the previous generation did for us. This is true in all aspects of life. I dont know how or when this viscious cycle ends, but it has to be soon.

#37

That’s what happens when people confuse amendment with commandment.

#38

A guy I know wrote a great book about this called, “Going Postal.” He basically blames rampant capitalism starting in the Reagan Era for it. People are pissed off and grumpy. Humiliated. Etc. Not sure if that is right But hey, its’ a theory.

I’m not sure why people blame guns either. I don’t own any guns. But the problem is clearly related to the media giving these things such huge coverage. If getting some massive bodycount of innocent children didnt make you famous then these incidents would stop happening. The fucked up youtube world we live inwehre everyone wants to make be famous even if its infamous.

#39

Yeah it does seem to be another mental illness issue like the Aurora killer.

#40

^I think media coverage is a main issue. I read one article right after and nothing since. Only way it stops getting absurd amounts of coverage is if peopel stop reading/ watching (which won’t happen). Also, I’m not overly interested in depressing myself by reading about all the the exact age and stories of each of these kids.