The Marketplace for Violent Rhetoric
Jan. 11th, 2011 08:10 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfsIn the wake of the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords, I was listening to a self-describe "righty" acquaintance of mine. The topic was the current handwringing about violent discourse, and she was quick with the Talking Point: "Lefties do it too!" As evidence for her point: In 2006, a movie was made called Death of a President, which is a "cold case" police procedural trying to figure out who assassinated George W. Bush. She had other examples, as does Michelle Malkin.
These examples are pathetic.
Follow the link to the movie. No, seriously: then go look at the budget and box office. The movie cost $2 million to make. It's opening weekend, it made $281,000 and it's total reported gross takings was $486,000.
The question is not whether crazy people on the left and the right exist and use stupid, inflammatory, violent speech. Of course they do.
The question is whether other people support it.
The left did not go out in droves and support a film suggesting that George W. Bush be assassinated. They don't go out and support speakers and politicians that use the inflammatory rhetoric of violence.
People on the right who use inflammatory rhetoric get $50 million a year radio contracts. They rent space and hold rallies on the national mall. They get their own reality TV shows. They get elected to Congress.
The left does not buy violent fantasy rhetoric in Costco volumes. The right does. They buy it, they pay for it, they eat and drink and breathe it, and they shouldn't be surprised when someone decides to live it out.
A catalog of Fox News hosts fantasizing about the death of liberals.
These examples are pathetic.
Follow the link to the movie. No, seriously: then go look at the budget and box office. The movie cost $2 million to make. It's opening weekend, it made $281,000 and it's total reported gross takings was $486,000.
The question is not whether crazy people on the left and the right exist and use stupid, inflammatory, violent speech. Of course they do.
The question is whether other people support it.
The left did not go out in droves and support a film suggesting that George W. Bush be assassinated. They don't go out and support speakers and politicians that use the inflammatory rhetoric of violence.
People on the right who use inflammatory rhetoric get $50 million a year radio contracts. They rent space and hold rallies on the national mall. They get their own reality TV shows. They get elected to Congress.
The left does not buy violent fantasy rhetoric in Costco volumes. The right does. They buy it, they pay for it, they eat and drink and breathe it, and they shouldn't be surprised when someone decides to live it out.
A catalog of Fox News hosts fantasizing about the death of liberals.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-01-11 08:59 pm (UTC)There is no "them," vast millions of people. They don't pay Fox, or the EIB network, nor do they pay Louis Farrakhan or any of the seemingly less numerous but no less vitriolic individuals on the other "side" of the "aisle". Advertisers pay Fox, and we blithely keep buying their products.
Simply telling Rush to stop it won't do it. It could be the tip of the iceberg, but the part that's gonna sink the Titanic of vitriol is gonna be you and me figuring out who advertises on their networks, calling them and writing them and emailing them and say, "Quittit alreddie, or we don't buy from you anymore, and we buy small shares of your stock and show up and ask painful questions at your board meetings." It's going to be me and you calling our senators and asking tough questions about the boards of directors of media juggernauts. It's going to be you and me asking our President why he's giving an interview to a network that rewards this kind of crap.
We can't tell "them" to change. We have to be the change we want to see.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-11 09:11 pm (UTC)Fat lot of good that did.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-11 11:43 pm (UTC)The problem isn't that large numbers of rightwing public figures have been inciting violence. (And they are; there's no way to hide that.) No, the problem is that they've been successful, that inciting violence against political opponents has been tacitly approved as a valid and useful tactic. Now, it's only a matter of time before one's political opponents start adopting one's own successful tactics. And when that tactic is inciting violence against others, it's only a matter of time before groups of non-mentally-ill people start gathering together and acting on it.
Like you, Elf, I don't see any way out. The only thing that will turn the tide is if the American Plutocrats wake up to the danger and defund anyone who threatens or encourages politically-motivated violence. Only when such language causes instant advertiser flight will it become career-killing.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-11 11:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-14 04:19 am (UTC)