Pardon our ramblings: Gabrielle Giffords & the tone of our discourse

(Please read the last couple of parts if nothing else.  I know it's long.  Feel free to skip the beginning; they're just ramblings.  The later part actually turns into something I'm kind of proud of.)

The shooting of Gabrielle Giffords on Saturday has been an interesting newsmaker.

---

The misreporting of the incident to initially include the Congresswoman's death was understandable in light of the likely chaos at the scene as well as the proliferation of amateur newsreporters via cellphone, twitter, YouTube, and the rest of Web 2.0.

I've actually been very happy not to have seen any sort of amateur video of the incident posted on YouTube...yet.  It's amazing that in our era of constant internet connectivity, omnipresent cellphone cameras, and unstoppable media leakage that no one has posted this video.  I will be even happier if no video of the incident exists or at least is ever posted online.

---

My CORE (our advisory students) today asked a number of really interesting questions about the incident.  Following our daily announcements, a separate announcement was made asking for a moment of silence for the six people who were killed in the incident.  After the announcement, I asked how many of my fifteen students knew about the event.  About half did, and we had a good discussion about the facts of the case for about ten minutes.

---

TheDailyWh.at covered the event via continual updates on their initial post.  I know I'm newish to the whole TheDailyWh.at thing, but they aren't one to give most news stories more than passing mention.  They aren't a news agency.  To me, the fact that they covered the event was surprising.

---

Much of the discussion after the incident focused on the increasingly angry and violent tone of our political discourse and how this might have contributed to the likelihood of such an attack.  On the surface this seems very reasonable and relevant.  I'm not sure that, upon further investigation, however that this connection should be automatically made.  The shooter - I'll say alleged shooter because the legal convention deems that I must label him thusly until conviction thought the idea of anyone but Jared Lee Loughner being convicted of this seems ludicrous - seems to be entirely unhinged.

His YouTube videos are nothing if not paranoid, and what little we know about the young man does not suggest someone driven to the brink by political decisions and rational if angry and vitriolic debate so much as a modern day Travis Bickle or Jack D Ripper, a man who has taken the smallest nuggets of political ramblings and allowed them to fester and foment within an obviously twisted mind until the only 'rational' response was the kill the enemy wherever they were to be found and identified.

The crazed actions of one man do not mean that an entire society's actions should be condemned.  Yes, we do need to shift our political - and non-political discourse - into a more civil direction.  While I disagree with Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin, turning them into demagogues and demons isn't any more appropriate a response than is their blind, angry lashings out.  Better, instead, to take the routes of Stephen Colbert and Tiny Fey in turning them into punchlines.  Humor will always win more converts than will vitriol.

---

Thankfully, very few people have reacted positively to the shooting.

One online comic retailer, however, posted a link to the news story in a forum on what appears to be his personal blog.  He headlined the post "1 down, 534 to go" referring to the combined number of Senators and US Representatives.  (See the post cached if, as I did earlier, you have trouble seeing the original post.)  In the post, he appears to be endorsing the armed attacking if not outright killing of members of our government.  The post was linked to from Comics Alliance, and that's how I found out about it.

The poster in question - Travis Corcoran - is the proprietor of Heavy Ink, and online comic distributor.  Corcoran runs a very political blog in which he openly advocates for the right of the people to bring up arms against their oppressors, oppressors in the name of the American government.  After the furor that the "1 down" post raised, Corcoran posted an entry clarifying his political beliefs.  In it, Corcoran admits that his post was intentionally callous but that he does not endorse the shooting of politicians because...

I think that today, there is little or no serious prospect for rolling back government by taking up arms. That, alone, disqualifies the idea of a revolution in 2011.

...a position that he bases on his Catholic beliefs and a Vatican catechism on Just War (to which he incorrectly links - corrected link here, scroll to 2309).

Admirably, Corcoran has allowed a discussion of his positions on a Heavy Ink forum.  Equally admirably, the tone of that discussion has been absolutely respectful and a spectacular example of how intelligent, rational discourse can be held over an issue that could very well devolve into the sort of violent name calling that has been so recently decried in the media.

I highly recommend reading the forum discussion to see how well discussions can be held when everyone involved takes the high road but is still willing to state their case.

Thank you to Travis Corcoran, Comics Alliance, Heavy Ink, and most especially to Heavy Ink's forum writers for inadvertently pointing out such a spectacular example of high-minded discourse.

---

The original title of this post was "If ever a boycott were in order", and my intent was to eventually point out the hateful writings of Mr Corcoran and discuss the consequences that a person's choice to make their private views very public can have on their professional lives (something of which I am constantly aware as I write this blog every day), but as I read the Heavy Ink forum, I felt my disappointment with Mr Corcoran's espoused beliefs lifting as his customers (many now more properly titled former customers) remained rational and friendly while putting forth their opinions.

I don't take advantage of Heavy Ink's services and likely would choose not to after reading Mr Corcoran's missives.  In spite of my turning of this post into something more positive than I may have initially intended, please do remember that our greatest weapon in protesting or disagreeing with the merchants who service us is our purchasing power.  If you firmly believe strongly that your merchants are doing wrong - politically, economically, racially, whatever-ly - do your due diligence and research, inform them of your views and your intent to take your business elsewhere, give them an opportunity to right their actions, and if they choose not to change, speak with your wallet and take your business elsewhere.

Boycotts can be powerful things.

(By the way, did any of you know that boycott came from Charles Boycott who was the first person to be boycotted?  I love Wikipedia.)