The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
by afew Sat Jul 21st, 2012 at 11:46:44 AM EST
Okay. Fair enough.
In which case the issue is not gun control - the issue is that US social culture is inherently criminal and institutionally violent, from the top down to street level.
It's not the guns that are the problem - although they certainly don't help. It's the fact that the free-for-all fuck-you ethics of US society means that you can never rely on friends or strangers or the police or the government or pretty much anyone to treat you with sanity, respect and consideration.
Friends probably will, most of the time. Likewise relatives. With everyone else, it's a crap shoot.
So guns symbolise the ability to protect yourself from a violent and insane society.
What no one seems to ask is - how did it get like this? And what can we do to make it saner?
Guns are at best a symptom. This is not to say that I support gun ownership - just that I think the real problem goes much deeper, and changing the gun laws won't fix it.
It's the fact that the free-for-all fuck-you ethics of US society means that you can never rely on friends or strangers or the police or the government or pretty much anyone to treat you with sanity, respect and consideration.
US society?
And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
Guns are a function of paranoia that has built up over many years. If you ask most people, you'll get little to no acknowledgement of the fact that you're probably more likely to get stabbed on the streets on Des Moines than you are on the streets of New York -- or that you're just flat-out a helluva lot likely to be the victim of violent crime today than you were 30 years ago. That's at best. At worst you'll get Paulist babbling about the FBI -- or more likely some vague bitching about "the feds" -- lying about the statistics.
The interesting thing to me about these events -- Columbine, Aurora, all of them -- is how they've sprung up after violent crime peaked in the late-'80s/early-'90s. Maybe that's a function of when I grew up. I was 15 when Columbine happened. But nothing really jumps to mind from the era before the crime peak, unless you want to count Kent State or something.
I've never owned a gun. Grew up in the South, with kinfolk in rural Georgia, so obviously it's not an alien thing to me. (I even learned to shoot when I was a boy scout. Just about destroyed my shoulder the first time I shot a 12-gauge.) But I've walked New York in the middle of the night. I've worked in Southeast DC -- one of the worst areas in the country -- in a building surrounded by an iron fence and barbed wire. And I've played shows in some neighborhoods in West Palm that would keep an average suburbanite awake well into his 50s.
Yet I never felt any need to have a gun. There's only ever been one or two occasions when I've even felt mildly intimidated by an area -- and one was just a couple blocks from Mig's place in London! -- and in both cases I put my head down and went on my way.
The fact is that, although violent crime is much higher here than it is in Europe, your chances of being a victim in an American city are pretty damned low. And once you adjust for the fact that the vast majority of murders are committed by and against people who know each other and have criminal reasons to be looking for each other (gangbangers fighting over turf, etc), it becomes pretty obvious that the risk for most people is just about zilch.
But the paranoia remains. And for that I blame the press, which has continued jacking up coverage of violent crimes despite the plummeting rates, and the public for a culture that continuously pushes things to be afraid of and faux-heroism. At base, most people know it's all bullshit, but the "Better to be safe..." mentality mixes with the "I'M JOHN MCCLAIN, BIATCH!!" mentality, and the results speak for themselves. Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
When Merkel went to the Bundesbank and emotionally blackmailed the assembled parlamentarians by asserting that "one cannot take 50 years of peace in Europe for granted", some old guy in rural Croatia thought to himself "I've lived through two wars in my lifetime [WWII and the Yugoslav wars] and the third one is not going to catch me unprepared", so he bought himself an arsenal. At least that's what he told the police when he got arrested after his neighbours reported him for suspicious activity.
Welcome to Europe, pre-WWIII. If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa
So Tallahasseeans have a general understanding that the South Side of town is the "dangerous" side. And it's true, in the sense that there's almost no violent crime on the North Side.
People speak of it as though you should never venture down there, lest you get shot.
So take a guess at how many murders -- in a city of 182,000 -- there typically are per year in Tallahassee. . . . . . . . . . . Five. Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
but bad by European figures, which are mistly around 1 per 100k Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
I fully buy into the idea of people traditionally owning rifles for hunting, it's still true that in some parts of the US a rifle can be the difference between meat or no meat on the table. But aside from that, gun ownership was falling in the first half of C20, remember guns may have won the west, but psychologically after OK Corral, civilisation required that guns vanish from the street. America, as a civilised country was growing up. Even the police were unarmed until the very worst excesses of Capone.
no, it was the civil rights era, when the racist right re-armed to "protect" themselves and their women from the rampaging other. Equally, black people armed themselves to protect themselves from the very real threat from the KKK.
that was when the arms race started. 50 years ago, not 400. keep to the Fen Causeway
At around 12.30 am this morning, while we slept off the journey, what greeted us was death .... yet again. Those who were still awake in our hotel heard the gunshots. Soon thereafter they heard the plaintive wail as first responders do what they do ... respond, from all over this city they came to tend to the wounded, sympathise with the dead, and arrest the killer. The killer who, in the last two months bought six thousand rounds for the Smith and Wesson Assault Rifle that was his weapon of choice, all perfectly legally. SIX THOUSAND FUCKING ROUNDS. I can't even buy three packs of Sudafed without the government wanting every detail down to my inside leg measurement. Yet this killer could buy six thousand rounds of ammunition, and innumerable magazines and clips, apparently with no questions asked. Does no one else think that there is something not quite right about that?
At around 12.30 am this morning, while we slept off the journey, what greeted us was death .... yet again. Those who were still awake in our hotel heard the gunshots. Soon thereafter they heard the plaintive wail as first responders do what they do ... respond, from all over this city they came to tend to the wounded, sympathise with the dead, and arrest the killer.
The killer who, in the last two months bought six thousand rounds for the Smith and Wesson Assault Rifle that was his weapon of choice, all perfectly legally. SIX THOUSAND FUCKING ROUNDS. I can't even buy three packs of Sudafed without the government wanting every detail down to my inside leg measurement. Yet this killer could buy six thousand rounds of ammunition, and innumerable magazines and clips, apparently with no questions asked.
Does no one else think that there is something not quite right about that?
He was going trap shooting.
And get this. Mr. Murdering Chucklehaed will get free room and board plus medical for the rest of his life on the taxpayers dime. And what do we get in exchange? A wonderful feeling of being civilized?
Forgive me for yawning through this entire minor incident ... I've got important things to ponder like physics today and tomatoes at the farmer's market tomorrow. I have a t-shirt with that on it. And whatever you do, DON'T BLINK!
This week evidence emerged that HSBC abetted massive money laundering by Iran, terrorist organisations, drug cartels and organised criminals. By this point, should this surprise us? Selling defective mortgage securities during the housing bubble; creating and selling securities to bet on their failure; bringing the world to the brink of collapse; colluding to manipulate interest rates; hyping your failing company while secretly selling your own stock; cooking the books; assisting Bernard Madoff. For many people in banking, it would seem, securities fraud, accounting fraud, perjury and conspiracy are just another day at the office. And yet, when I first encountered the world of money laundering while conducting research for my film Inside Job, I was still surprised.
Glasgow, United Kingdom - Muslims living in the UK feel more British than their white counterparts. It's a surprising statement that demands an explanation. In a study released in late June, the Institute for Social and Economic Research asked 40,000 households a series of questions, including how important, on a scale of one to ten, being British was to them. People of Pakistani origin scored the highest with an average of 7.76, Bangladeshi and Indian groups came second and third, while the white population scored lowest - with an average of 6.58. The report's authors believe the results disprove suggestions that ethnic groups are unable to integrate into British society.
It's a surprising statement that demands an explanation. In a study released in late June, the Institute for Social and Economic Research asked 40,000 households a series of questions, including how important, on a scale of one to ten, being British was to them.
People of Pakistani origin scored the highest with an average of 7.76, Bangladeshi and Indian groups came second and third, while the white population scored lowest - with an average of 6.58.
The report's authors believe the results disprove suggestions that ethnic groups are unable to integrate into British society.
eg In Wales is english by birth, but is Welsh by deliberate commitment. keep to the Fen Causeway
In any case, the headline is a bad paraphrase. In the article body: a series of questions, including how important, on a scale of one to ten, being British was to them.
Of course being British "is important" to people of Pakistani descent - they know they have an easier time with a British passport than their cousins with a Pakistani passport. If only for utilitarian reasons it's "important to them". Whereas white Britons cannot imagine being anything other than British (or, if they had an English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish passport they wouldn't feel disadvantaged) so therefore it's not important to them. Water is invisible to the fish. If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa
Reading the Essex University PR, they refer to such and such group "associat(ing] more or less closely with Britishness". I don't have an extensive knowledge of nationality and minorities issues in Britain, but the results do not seem surprising to me: Brown skinned and Muslim ethnic groups feel more strongly the need to "associate with Britishness" than, say, Anglican whites (whose Britishness, I gather, is seldom questioned, least of all by themselves). Really, who should be surprised?
In France too, ethnic minorities, particularly Muslim, feel need to express their Frenchness (citoyens à part entière: full-fledged citizens) as a preemptive answer to the implicit questioning from the pervasive racist view of Muslims and Arabs not being truly French.
Other points I found interesting in the article:
UK Muslims feel 'more British' than whites - Features - Al Jazeera English
What is it about Englishness that shuts out people who aren't white?
With:
He [Labour leader Ed Miliband] was referring to the way in which far-right racists, such as the English Defence League, appear to have contaminated the idea of what it means to be English.
Also interesting:
The debate is different in Scotland, where British identity is much weaker than in other parts of the UK. North of the border, Scottishness trumps Britishness even among ethnic minorities.[...]Professor John Curtice, from Strathclyde University, says: "In Scotland, Scottishness has been sold as a multicultural identity and it does not have the same association with xenophobia as Englishness."
This made me remember the kebab restaurant I saw in Le Mans five years ago, named "LA REPUBLIQUE". *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
Restaurant and café owners, minority or otherwise, generally go with the obvious when choosing a name for their place: it feels homey... Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
Serious writers, some of whom really ought to know better, have expended several forests trying to define "Englishness". Let alone Alex Salmond's attempts to sidestep BraveHeart when defining Scottishness.
and that makes it dificult for immigrants to buy into. Mig is quite correct when he suggests that 3rd and 4th generation immigrants can wear Englishness more easily than their parents. You opt into such things, but must wear them lightly. keep to the Fen Causeway
Scottish Labour's Deputy Leader, Anas Sarwar, whose family comes from Pakistan, says he classes himself as Scottish, although if he were asked for an identity he identified with more closely than that of his country, he would probably say "Glaswegian".
RT @ap BREAKING: Spokeswoman says Rupert Murdoch resigns from News Corp. subsidiary boards in Britain, US
Rupert Murdoch steps down from NI boards - Telegraph
Companies House filings show that Mr Murdoch stepped down from the boards of the NI Group, Times Newspaper Holdings and News Corp Investments in the UK last week. He also quit a number of News Corp's US boards, the details of which have yet to be disclosed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission. News Corporation played down the significance of the resignations as "nothing more than a corporate housecleaning exercise prior to the company split".
Companies House filings show that Mr Murdoch stepped down from the boards of the NI Group, Times Newspaper Holdings and News Corp Investments in the UK last week. He also quit a number of News Corp's US boards, the details of which have yet to be disclosed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
News Corporation played down the significance of the resignations as "nothing more than a corporate housecleaning exercise prior to the company split".
"I hear Rupert Murdoch has had an arsehole transplant"
"Yes, but did you see the Stop Press ? The arsehole's rejected him" keep to the Fen Causeway
For Viacom chief Sumner Redstone, airing shows with offensive content isn't a problem. Redstone grew up in the entertainment business. After earning a law degree and acquainting himself with the intricacies of tax law, he joined his father's movie theater chain. Redstone's crucial insight was to recognize that, while new means of distribution might evolve, content was the vital commodity. He built his father's business accordingly, eventually acquiring Viacom in a hostile takeover. The corporation now owns 170 media networks and thousands of programs, including Jersey Shore, which celebrates binge drinking, brawling, and the vigorous pursuit of venereal disease and melanoma. In the corporate mindset, the specifics of "content" are irrelevant. Either you generate the necessary margin, or you cease to exist. "Content is king," as Redstone is famously fond of pointing out. And profit is God.
For Viacom chief Sumner Redstone, airing shows with offensive content isn't a problem. Redstone grew up in the entertainment business. After earning a law degree and acquainting himself with the intricacies of tax law, he joined his father's movie theater chain. Redstone's crucial insight was to recognize that, while new means of distribution might evolve, content was the vital commodity. He built his father's business accordingly, eventually acquiring Viacom in a hostile takeover. The corporation now owns 170 media networks and thousands of programs, including Jersey Shore, which celebrates binge drinking, brawling, and the vigorous pursuit of venereal disease and melanoma.
In the corporate mindset, the specifics of "content" are irrelevant. Either you generate the necessary margin, or you cease to exist. "Content is king," as Redstone is famously fond of pointing out. And profit is God.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/21/1112424/-Murdochgate-Rupert-steps-down Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
Major_Freedom7:26 AMThe core problem with both macroeconomics and microeconomics in "mainstream" economics today is that the profession has been almost completely infiltrated by anti-rationalists. On the one hand we have hermeneutics, rhetoric, and epistemological anarchism, on the other we have empiricism, positivism, and epistemological skepticism.I don't know how to make this sound non-cliché, but since at least the 1950s, a war has been waged against economic science. Most philosophers and economists are (mistakenly, IMO) approaching the social sciences the way a physicist approaches matter.
The core problem with both macroeconomics and microeconomics in "mainstream" economics today is that the profession has been almost completely infiltrated by anti-rationalists. On the one hand we have hermeneutics, rhetoric, and epistemological anarchism, on the other we have empiricism, positivism, and epistemological skepticism.I don't know how to make this sound non-cliché, but since at least the 1950s, a war has been waged against economic science. Most philosophers and economists are (mistakenly, IMO) approaching the social sciences the way a physicist approaches matter.
Your hometown is probably vibrant, too. Every city is either vibrant these days or is working on a plan to attain vibrancy soon. The reason is simple: a city isn't successful-- isn't even a city, really--unless it can lay claim to being "vibrant." Vibrancy is so universally desirable, so totemic in its powers, that even though we aren't sure what the word means, we know the quality it designates must be cultivated. The vibrant, we believe, is what makes certain cities flourish. The absence of vibrancy, by contrast, is what allows the diseases of depopulation and blight to set in. This formulation sounded ridiculous to me when I first encountered it. Whatever the word meant, "vibrancy" was surely an outcome of civic prosperity, not its cause. Putting it the other way round was like reasoning that, since sidewalks get wet when it rains, we can encourage rainfall by wetting the sidewalks. But to others, the vibrancy mantra is profoundly persuasive. The pursuit of the vibrant seems to be the universal job description of the nation's city planners nowadays. It is also part of the Obama administration's economic recovery strategy for the nation. In the fall of 2011, the National Endowment for the Arts launched "ArtPlace," a joint project with the nation's largest banks and foundations, and ArtPlace immediately began generating a cloud of glowing euphemisms around the central, hallowed cliché: ArtPlace is investing in art and culture at the heart of a portfolio of integrated strategies that can drive vibrancy and diversity so powerful that it transforms communities. Specifically, vibrancy transforms communities by making them more prosperous. Art- Place says its goal is not merely to promote the arts but to "transform economic development in America," a project that is straightforward and obvious if you accept the organization's slogan: "Art creates vibrancy and increases economic opportunity." And that, presumably, is why everyone is so damn vibrant these days. Consider Akron, Ohio, which was recently the subject of a conference bearing the thrilling name "Greater Akron: This Is What Vibrant Looks Like." Or Boise, Idaho, whose citizens, according to the city's Department of Arts and History, are "fortunate to live in a vibrant community in which creativity flourishes in every season." Or Cincinnati, which is the home of a nonprofit called "Go Vibrant" as well as the Greater Cincinnati Foundation, which hands out "Cultural Vibrancy" grants, guided by the knowledge that "Cultural Vibrancy is vital to a thriving community." Is Rockford, Illinois, vibrant? Oh my god yes: according to a local news outlet, the city's "Mayor's Arts Award nominees make Rockford vibrant." The Quad Cities? Check: As their tourism website explains, the four hamlets are "a vibrant community of cities sharing the Mississippi River in both Iowa and Illinois." Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania? Need you even ask? Pittsburgh is a sort of Athens of the vibrant; a city where dance parties and rock concerts enjoy the vigorous boosting of an outfit called "Vibrant Pittsburgh"; a place that draws young people from across the nation to frolic in its "numerous hip and vibrant neighborhoods," according to a blog maintained by a consortium of Pittsburgh business organizations.
This formulation sounded ridiculous to me when I first encountered it. Whatever the word meant, "vibrancy" was surely an outcome of civic prosperity, not its cause. Putting it the other way round was like reasoning that, since sidewalks get wet when it rains, we can encourage rainfall by wetting the sidewalks. But to others, the vibrancy mantra is profoundly persuasive. The pursuit of the vibrant seems to be the universal job description of the nation's city planners nowadays. It is also part of the Obama administration's economic recovery strategy for the nation. In the fall of 2011, the National Endowment for the Arts launched "ArtPlace," a joint project with the nation's largest banks and foundations, and ArtPlace immediately began generating a cloud of glowing euphemisms around the central, hallowed cliché:
ArtPlace is investing in art and culture at the heart of a portfolio of integrated strategies that can drive vibrancy and diversity so powerful that it transforms communities.
Specifically, vibrancy transforms communities by making them more prosperous. Art- Place says its goal is not merely to promote the arts but to "transform economic development in America," a project that is straightforward and obvious if you accept the organization's slogan: "Art creates vibrancy and increases economic opportunity."
And that, presumably, is why everyone is so damn vibrant these days. Consider Akron, Ohio, which was recently the subject of a conference bearing the thrilling name "Greater Akron: This Is What Vibrant Looks Like." Or Boise, Idaho, whose citizens, according to the city's Department of Arts and History, are "fortunate to live in a vibrant community in which creativity flourishes in every season." Or Cincinnati, which is the home of a nonprofit called "Go Vibrant" as well as the Greater Cincinnati Foundation, which hands out "Cultural Vibrancy" grants, guided by the knowledge that "Cultural Vibrancy is vital to a thriving community."
Is Rockford, Illinois, vibrant? Oh my god yes: according to a local news outlet, the city's "Mayor's Arts Award nominees make Rockford vibrant." The Quad Cities? Check: As their tourism website explains, the four hamlets are "a vibrant community of cities sharing the Mississippi River in both Iowa and Illinois." Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania? Need you even ask? Pittsburgh is a sort of Athens of the vibrant; a city where dance parties and rock concerts enjoy the vigorous boosting of an outfit called "Vibrant Pittsburgh"; a place that draws young people from across the nation to frolic in its "numerous hip and vibrant neighborhoods," according to a blog maintained by a consortium of Pittsburgh business organizations.
°going to pittsburg, pittsburg here i come° "It's very hard to see what is kept invisible" Roseanne Barr
"Vibrancy" isn't really one of the things we go for; we're into "more federal DOD and social security handouts to rabid anti-government Tea Party enthusiasts."
by DoDo - May 20 9 comments
by Nomad - May 10 14 comments
by JakeS - May 15 7 comments
by Metatone - May 14 85 comments
by ARGeezer - May 16 13 comments
by gmoke - May 17 2 comments
by DoDo - May 12 11 comments
by Migeru - May 6 100 comments
by DoDo - May 209 comments
by gmoke - May 172 comments
by ARGeezer - May 1613 comments
by JakeS - May 157 comments
by Metatone - May 1485 comments
by DoDo - May 1211 comments
by Nomad - May 1014 comments
by Migeru - May 78 comments
by marco - May 782 comments
by Migeru - May 6100 comments
by Ted Welch - May 35 comments
by afew - May 340 comments
by ceebs - May 26 comments
by gmoke - Apr 301 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 3067 comments
by joelado - Apr 2954 comments
by Metatone - Apr 2854 comments
by ATinNM - Apr 275 comments
by ceebs - Apr 265 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 2686 comments