Cal Berkeley Democrats

I think it’s important that we draw a distinction between the negative effects of destructive political rhetoric in America and the terrible tragedy in Tucson. Clearly, this gunman, Jared Lee Laughner, was deeply disturbed and committed an atrocious act that no sane American could possibly condone. It is unlikely that Loughner would have targeted a Congresswoman without some kind of political motivation, but it is also becoming apparent that his own political views were fragmented, confusing, and mixed with completely nonsensical ideas such as a belief in mind control. Whether or not he was influenced by modern America’s rhetorical climate is probably going to be impossible to determine, but today’s corrosive political discourse shouldn’t need this catalyst in order to be be critically examined.

We know that violent, demonizing, and even apocalyptic rhetoric is damaging to democracy in its own right. It leads us to disrespect, fear, and hate our political rivals, weakens our ability to compromise and cooperate, and reduces our ability to empathize with those whose values are different from our own. The temptation to use this abrasive language isn’t a recent phenomenon, and it isn’t exclusive to one party or faction. So long as their has been free speech, there has been abuse of free speech. This is not something we can outlaw; it is something we must take responsibility for and work to end.

Through his actions, Jared Loughner proved that he is not a part of any political ideology. left or right, that is acceptable in a democracy like America’s. Whatever our political slant, we can all agree that in order for democracy to survive, people like him cannot be allowed to be a part of the equation. Let’s not overburden ourselves looking for his motivation, whether it was concrete our intangible. Sarah Palin’s map wasn’t responsible for this murder, nor was Congress, nor Fox News, nor MSNBC.

Doubtless, the events in Tucson will spark many debates: on mental health education and treatment, on gun control, and of course, on modern political rhetoric. I, for one, welcome these debates, despite the fact that they may not lead to any substantial results, just more partisan disagreement. But that’s to be expected and embraced as part of the democratic process. My greatest hope is that we won’t need an example of the “slippery slope” to remind us to act decently towards one another in the political arena. If a wake up call is the one good that comes from this horrific tragedy, so be it. But let’s treat each other with respect and empathy anyway, even for the trivial reasons.