How to explain 2016?
I'm reading a book called Massacre at Mountain Meadows, by Walker, Turley, and Leonard. It was suggested by a good friend, whose grandfather was in the area at the time, but declined to get involved. It's about a dark piece of Utah history. Well, it wasn't even the State of Utah back then. There were 4 Indians to every white man, according to the historians. I'm still on the preface, but there are some interesting points made already. The book was published in 2008. But it speaks of things that reflect 2016, which is far too close to the times preceding the massacre. The tragedy was on September 11, 1857. (Is September 11th cursed or something?). More than 100 people were killed, and most of the victims were women and children. I have read a couple of books on the event, but this one has a cartload of details on how it was researched so thoroughly and put in context of the current state of the country and area.
I read 2 paragraphs and it could have been written this summer, in 2016. It helps me to try to begin to understand things like the killing of police officers that is a big deal this year. And the Muslim bashing.
"Scholars who have investigated violence in many cultures provide other insights based on group psychology. Episodes of violence often begin when one people classify another as "the other", stripping them of any humanity and mentally transforming them into enemies. Once this process of devaluing and demonizing occurs, stereotypes take over, rumors circulate, and pressure builds to conform to group action against a perceived threat. Those classified as the enemy are often seen as the transgressors, even as steps are being taken against them. When these conditions exist, a single incident, small or ordinary in usual circumstances, may spark great violence ending in atrocity.
The literature suggests other elements are often present when "good people" do terrible things. Usually there is an atmosphere of authority and obedience, which allows errant leaders to trump the moral instincts of their followers. Atrocities also occur when followers do not have clear messages about what is expected of them - when their culture or messages from headquarters leave local leaders wondering what to do. Poverty increases the likelihood of problems by raising concerns about survival. The conditions for mass killing - demonizing, authority, obedience, peer pressure, ambiguity, fear, and deprivation - all were present in southern Utah in 1957."
And then follows my personal bottom line:
" We believe errors were made by many (on all sides). At each point along the chain of events - a single personal choice or policy might have brought a different result. Though we as authors know the presumption of judging past events without having lived them."
Now that I've written it out, it also seems to relate a little to the election chaos this year. The one fault I have seen this year is what appears to be the ordinary every day citizen not looking at the whole story, and the bigger picture, and both sides of anything. In general, this is what I have seen. People react: "Someone died!" Then they don't wait to get the whole story before making a decision. And usually the decision is to become angry. Facts are important. That's all I'm saying.
"Much of our book deals with the final days before the mass killing. We hope that readers will see not scapegoats but a complex event in which many people and forces had a role to play."
I don't like to justify bad things. But I wasn't a part of that desperation and suffering. Some of the killers had experienced violence in Missouri towards them. And in Illinois, and a U.S. army was marching toward the Utah Territory in 1857, and the people who came to live their lives and settle there - felt like there were going to become victims again. I still have the prologue, before starting chapter 1. I'm glad I dragged this book to Costa Rica with me. The actual book is just a bit bigger than the list of footnotes and sources and appendixes. Pages 234 to 430 are all research details!
I read 2 paragraphs and it could have been written this summer, in 2016. It helps me to try to begin to understand things like the killing of police officers that is a big deal this year. And the Muslim bashing.
"Scholars who have investigated violence in many cultures provide other insights based on group psychology. Episodes of violence often begin when one people classify another as "the other", stripping them of any humanity and mentally transforming them into enemies. Once this process of devaluing and demonizing occurs, stereotypes take over, rumors circulate, and pressure builds to conform to group action against a perceived threat. Those classified as the enemy are often seen as the transgressors, even as steps are being taken against them. When these conditions exist, a single incident, small or ordinary in usual circumstances, may spark great violence ending in atrocity.
The literature suggests other elements are often present when "good people" do terrible things. Usually there is an atmosphere of authority and obedience, which allows errant leaders to trump the moral instincts of their followers. Atrocities also occur when followers do not have clear messages about what is expected of them - when their culture or messages from headquarters leave local leaders wondering what to do. Poverty increases the likelihood of problems by raising concerns about survival. The conditions for mass killing - demonizing, authority, obedience, peer pressure, ambiguity, fear, and deprivation - all were present in southern Utah in 1957."
And then follows my personal bottom line:
" We believe errors were made by many (on all sides). At each point along the chain of events - a single personal choice or policy might have brought a different result. Though we as authors know the presumption of judging past events without having lived them."
Now that I've written it out, it also seems to relate a little to the election chaos this year. The one fault I have seen this year is what appears to be the ordinary every day citizen not looking at the whole story, and the bigger picture, and both sides of anything. In general, this is what I have seen. People react: "Someone died!" Then they don't wait to get the whole story before making a decision. And usually the decision is to become angry. Facts are important. That's all I'm saying.
"Much of our book deals with the final days before the mass killing. We hope that readers will see not scapegoats but a complex event in which many people and forces had a role to play."
I don't like to justify bad things. But I wasn't a part of that desperation and suffering. Some of the killers had experienced violence in Missouri towards them. And in Illinois, and a U.S. army was marching toward the Utah Territory in 1857, and the people who came to live their lives and settle there - felt like there were going to become victims again. I still have the prologue, before starting chapter 1. I'm glad I dragged this book to Costa Rica with me. The actual book is just a bit bigger than the list of footnotes and sources and appendixes. Pages 234 to 430 are all research details!
Comments
Post a Comment