I am reading the Economist and getting a feel for a commentary that criticizes Krugman for writing about how words can have effects. Well it's trivial observation now that Hitler used them to get people angry enough to act, so why not see a cause effect relationship here. Or, do we deny the effect of speeches on peoples mentation. Dah, I think not. In my view Sarah Palin is not a positive force in American politics and things have slipped back to the rhetoric of the 1990's. Conservative Americans are very adept at getting their own people angry just as are people of any political persuasion.
Don't you like it when there is silence!
As having lived in all three countries of Britain, Canada and the United States and listened to the political argumentation that goes on, I would say that what surprises me is that there is not more violence. I think people in all three countries are pretty cool. The viciousness is there and you always get a blast of it if you watch television and news. You get more than you can take if you listen to some channels where the sniping is a constant thunder of negative commentary.
So, if you are inclined to observe what's going on around you, perhaps Krugman's claims are not exaggerated all that much. What is worrying is that there is no real cause and effect other than something like turning up the heat for water to boil. The fact that the eruption in Tucson occurred in the winter months should give us pause for thought. What if we have a hot summer next year. Will Americans be so cool or will they reach for the gun in their coolers? Will they wear fire arms to church? Will the public transport systems have to implement security measures to protect us from the terror coming from within?
What is this thing about words and meaning? Why should we care?
My own view is that people are easily trapped in logic nets that lead them to circular thinking. Instead of thinking outside the box, they cannot escape the logic that has built up inside their brains until it forces them into irrational actions, such as what occurred in Tucson. The problem as any computer programmer will tell you is that logic contains pointers and the pointers direct the individual towards a specific action. People like Palin who used a lot of pointers in their speech probably do NOT realize how cybernetic mental processes of the logic netted individual can be.
Like a computer gamer, the trapped individual is pointed towards an act and has little control over what follows. We may call it insanity, but it is not! Rather, it is the forces of words and logic and pointers that lead to violence and we could all learn a lesson from that.
Put a probability on a pointer just as bread retailers would put red tags on bread wrapped to point them out to buyers who then responded on a probabilistic basis. I know because I worked for the largest bakery in North America in it's time and colour and pointers really do spawn action as any advertiser knows.
Is Palin guilty? Who knows? But, yes it's words that count!
http://www.economist.com/blogs/johnson/2011/01/conspiracy_theory
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-potok/who-is-jared-lee-loughner_b_806500.html
Economist:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/01/spinning_tucson
Liberal Krugman:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/assassination-attempt-in-arizona/
Esra Klein of the WP:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/01/some_thoughts_on_the_shooting.html#more
Another writer:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10douthat.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Regulate Guns more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/opinion/13kristof.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB
Time is, was and will be. Without time we would not be. What a load it has to carry! Time seems eternal! You might even ask whether cycles in time exist? If so read Roger Penrose's book on new attitudes in physics towards possible "Cycles in Time".