View Single Post
Old
07-26-2012, 12:05 PM
  #260
Sgarbossy
Registered User
 
Sgarbossy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,348
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Jones View Post
What do you mean, "what was America about"?

I mean, if you're going to make the argument that America was about freedom simply because they wanted freedom from england, well then every revolution is about freedom, and most certainly this is not true.

But what was America about?

Truth is, America is "about" what almost everything is about, opportunism and self-want. I generally don't belive in historical narration.

What happens is that people try to place vast philosophic or ideological undertones to historical events that were almost always far more nuanced, far more complex, and far less intellectually pure.

People try to state, "America was about freedom" in the modern day because that's what we want it to be about. America has always been a nation obsessed with it's own moral superiority and we keep bending the story of our nation to fit whatever the popular ideological undertow is.

Was there some sort of notion of freedom in the founding of America? Sure, I guess. but is that really why people joined the revolution? No, it was generally because they didn't want to pay the taxes, or because they wanted representation in Parliament, or because they didn't like the intrusions of the british army, not because they wanted to expand freedom per se.

The idea of America wasn't a singular concept upon founding, it was many things to many people. Ever since that founding we've made it about stuff. That's how historical narration happens. Usually things happen not because of the singularity of intrest, but the confluence of opportunity.

The american revolution and the founding of America happened because a lot of people found a similar way (revolution) in which they could capitalize on whatever their issue was with the British, not because of "freedom", that was only part of the story.
Listen, I am not going to address any of this because it had nothing to do with my original point. I do appreciate your thoughtful response though. My point was that this is not a gun control issue. It should not become a gun control issue, nor would changes in gun control policy have prevented this nutjob from doing something equally terrifying or destructive. While I admit we cannot truly know what this guy would have done in the absence of firearms, many people agree that the opportunity would have been there for Holmes to act upon. I think that is a fair and reasonable speculation. Maybe the appeal to emotion about soldiers defending the constitution threw this off track.

This incident should highlight, if anything, the fundamental flaws in not only the state of mental health care in our nation, but also of our health care system overall. Don't bother to ask me what the solution is, because I haven't the foggiest idea.
Perhaps even with ideal mental health care the shooting would have happened anyways. We have no idea.

Sgarbossy is offline   Reply With Quote