So they think theyve got him, or them. My question is: What will many people in the D.C. area and throughout the U.S. do now for not entertainment, since that would trivialize the needs served, but a sense of meaning. Not everyone; there are those who did not bathe in the experience.
But Im thinking of a witness to an earlier takedown, of two illegal immigrants in a van. He described it as not just exciting when they went in, the adrenaline got going but edifying: It was, um, impressive. What is it he found so, um, significant?
Consider Michael Moores new, Canadian-produced film, Bowling for Columbine, on guns and death in the U.S.
He is a lifelong marksman and National Rifle Association member, from gun-crazy Michigan, so hes qualified and looks comfy around guns. In a nice twist, he doesnt claim their mere presence is the source of all the death. Canada, he says, for which he has always shown an ardour that may go beyond the rational, is a society with lots of guns, too, but a vastly lower murder rate. Instead, he stresses the culture of fear that pervades the U.S.
Their news often seems to consist of murders (and some fires). In a period when murders declined by twenty per cent, murder coverage rose six-hundred per cent. But almost any fear will do, like the killer bees who never came. Once the film points this out, you start seeing it everywhere.
On ABC News on Wednesday, virtually the only story besides the sniper was that contact lenses can mangle your corneas, if you buy them at a gas station. That day, George W. Bush made two TV appearances, neither of which concerned the sniper, but both of which were good and scary, as if the country needed more. In the morning, he signed a bill to spend huge sums on weapons against Americas enemies. In the afternoon, he spoke about Internet pornography and perverts targeting kids (contact CyberTips), and really got into it. You felt he wasnt just scaring parents; he was scared himself.
That day, CBCs The National led with the resignation of our former boob Solicitor-General, Lawrence MacAulay. Plus Statscan released a new set of data on Canadian families. Oh, and the D.C. sniper. Given the inundation from U.S. sources, it tends to make Canada look naive. But, really, who lives in a fantasy realm? Bowling for Columbines sweetest moment comes when Michael Moore asks some Canadian teenagers if theyd shoot a kid they dont like, they say no, and he says, What would you do? Maybe tease him, giggles a gangly boy. As I say, Michael Moore can seem a bit naive on Canada himself but, in comparative terms, the point holds.
Someone in the film says the point about America seems to be: Get scared and buy something to deal with it a missile system, a private arsenal, a burger with fries. The fear is out there. For a macho culture, its a bit embarrassing. Rambo having an anxiety attack. Every minute. If theres widespread paranoia, then genuine threats, like the odd sniper or bioterror, seem even scarier. Yet what lies behind it, what is it that makes Americans so prone to fear, well beyond what is justified?
Michael Moore pulls his punches a little here. He seems to want to argue its based on the absence of any sense of collective security; if you get sick, lose your job or are born poor America will lend less help than any comparable country. Theyll throw you off welfare and out of the emergency room.
People rightly feel isolated and fearful. But the source goes unrecognized; and the fear winds up being projected onto (falling) crime and killer bees.
So one can see why Americans feel fear, and why some might want them to (like Martin Marietta, the worlds biggest armsmaker, headquarted near Columbine High). But why do many also seem to actually embrace the fear (It was, um, impressive), find some satisfaction, or even delight in it? There are people, Id say, who will miss the story if the sniper really has been caught, and look elsewhere for more.
Well, there has always been a problem of unity in the United States, as its name testifies. Its a society that is racially, economically and politically divided. Theres not much in common beyond myth and rhetoric (the greatest country in the history of the world) or vapid fellow-feeling (my fellow Americans). It provides less thats concrete and which people share, like social programs, than it did in the past.
At least their fear unites them and, if it has an empirical basis like a sniper, all the better. Fear as the national hearth. Franklin D. Roosevelt, in one of his fireside chats, united his country, in the depths of a depression, saying: We have nothing to fear but fear itself, then backed it up with social security and other programs. Under George W. Bush, it may come down to a terser,We have nothing but fear itself.
Thank you for reading this story…
More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.
rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.
So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.
And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.