Like many people out there, I’m having a hard time thinking
about anything right now but the horrible massacre in the elementary school in Sandy
Hook, Connecticut. No, massacre isn’t the right word. Slaughter, might be. I
don’t know. What kind of language is needed to describe the endless pain and
horror that has happened and that will result? What words will describe the
feelings of the parents who are breaking into a million pieces right now? I
would ask a poet for help, but poetry is inherently beautiful, and nothing in
this scenario is. I probably shouldn’t even be writing a blog now since I’ll
only risk getting myself in trouble, but what else can I do? I’m a philosopher.
I think out loud.
The first thing to acknowledge then is that the dominant
emotion in this country right now is not sadness or grief, but terror–terror
for our children who leave our sight every single day and terror for our children
who live in a world that we cannot even begin to control. Non-parents feel this
way too, of course. Adults were victims and there are no doubt people who lost
spouses today, not to mention children who lost parents and best friends who
lost lifelong companions; the possibilities are too awful to enumerate. And out
of my own fear, the anxiety of someone with a child in an elementary school as
I’m writing this, I want to argue that parents feel all of this more acutely
than anyone else (we shouldn’t forget that the adult victims had parents too),
but nothing good ever came from ranking suffering. Horror and pain are not
competitive sports. [The news just released what sounds like the total number
of victims. What do numbers mean and how can a number signify 26 lives of infinite
possibilities.]
So, we must acknowledge that what is really happening on the internet is a mass outpouring of terror that is manifesting itself as anger about gun policy. And, as a result, people are asking, and will ask for the next week, at least, when the right time to talk about gun control is. Here’s the only answer that I can come up with: the proper time to talk about gun policy is when having the discussion has the possibility of changing people’s minds
Let me explain. The purpose of a national conversation about
any policy is to move people to a point of agreement and, perhaps, compromise. If
no agreement can be found, then no changes can be made. Sometimes this
conversation is virulent; it certainly is when people talk about gay rights. And
sometimes the debate is resolved by court fiat, as it was with desegregation,
or by a tiny majority, as happens with many elections. Nevertheless, it is
still the case that in a democracy, the goal of the conversation is to get
people to alter their positions, even somewhat, to get something accomplished. I am convinced that my position on gun control is the right one, but if there
is absolutely no chance at all that I will ever change my mind, even just a
tiny bit, then maybe, just maybe, I shouldn’t be allowed in the discussion. I
don’t mean, of course, that I should be willing to change my fundamental position,
but perhaps I ought to reconsider nuance, or a timetable, or give something up for the sake of making this
country progressively safer and more just.
Can we therefore imagine a circumstance when people who
reject gun control and people who are in favor of it can get together and have
a real discussion that might alter their perspective just a little? If we can,
it will have to be a pretty controlled debate, one where emotions are kept in
check and evidence is required for positions. It would have to be an event,
with many installments, over time, and it would have to be massive. Perhaps we
need a series of televised debates with experts and we need to devote as much
time as the Republicans did to the primary. Perhaps there should be town hall
meetings and small-group study sessions. But it shouldn’t be pundits on news
channels yelling at each other; that only makes things worse. The fact of the
matter is that if we think anyone can and will ever change their mind, then we
need to actually have the conversation. Those who don’t want us to engage must
be assuming that a debate will get people to disagree with them. They resist
the discussion because they are scared that they are wrong. But that’s not the
way to govern a country and as naïve as it must seem to read this right now, we
still, as citizens in the U.S., govern ourselves.
Contrary to many these days, I do think people change their
minds on central issues, and I have known quite a few who have changed their
political parties after life taught them certain lessons (often the hard way).
I also know, as a teacher, that students can be affected by a class, or a
movie, or a book, or a conversation. It is possible to get people to reconsider
but only when you treat them with respect. This is why pundits are no help.
They don’t respect the opposition, or at least, they act like they don’t for
the camera. This is going to take time and it’s not a job for the people who make
their living getting ratings on television. I wish it were.
So, here is what I have to say: we must all recognize that right now, people are being governed by their emotions and that this reaction is natural. And while have to prioritize the love and care of the victims and their friends, we will, eventually, have to talk. No matter how hard it will be to do so, we need to talk. To one another, to people we disagree with, to our government officials, to our neighbors, friends, and even enemies. We need to talk.
The New York Times just released the name of the
mass-murderer and reported that his mother was likely the teacher of the
kindergarten class. So I will add that we need to talk about caring for the
mentally ill in this country, as well. We need to talk about the isolation and
alienation of our teenagers and young adults. We need to talk about justice and
dysfunction within families and the desire to be famous at all costs. All of
these things, I am sure, will be related to today’s horror. But in the end, we will
need to talk about guns. No matter how hard the discussion will be, no matter
how long it takes, no matter what political careers it endangers, we have to start
talking now. And if this too scares you I’ll simply remind you that talking is better
than destroying people through our silence. And sadly, we’ve destroyed a lot of
people lately.
ADDENDUM, 12/15/2012: I have added a follow-up post starting the conversation I ask for.
ADDENDUM, 12/15/2012: I have added a follow-up post starting the conversation I ask for.
No comments:
Post a Comment