Political and media responses to the murder of the two television journalists in Virginia reflect how the corruption of language produces the corruption of thinking that combine to create the corruption of human society. CNN referred to the killing of these two people as a “massacre,” a distortion with its origins in earlier American history. If two Indians killed two members of the 7th Cavalry in a fight, journalists and historians obligingly characterized the event as a “massacre.” But if one hundred cavalrymen killed fifty men, women, and children of an Indian village, it became known as a “battle.” For the sake of consistency, will CNN hereafter refer to the killing of two or more victims – even when brought about by police officers or soldiers in Afghanistan – as “massacres?”
What, too, of the practice – engaged in by media babblers generally – of using unfounded speculations to explain what the known facts do not reveal?
Then there was the county sheriff in Virginia who referred to the killer as a “gentleman.” I’m sorry, Sheriff, but gentlemen do not go around murdering people!
Hillary – along with others – rushed to the TV cameras to exploit these killings for political advantage. The problems of “gun violence” must be addressed, she insisted, leading intelligent minds to wonder if this woman is so uninformed about the laws of causation as to believe that the possession of a gun can force otherwise decent and responsible people to go on killing sprees? If she truly believes this, can we expect her to propose disarming the police and military, whose weaponry is far more powerful and in the hands of far greater numbers of people than the occasional “nut-with-a-gun”? Furthermore, if Hillary is so out of touch with causal explanations of events, how sound would her explanations for economic dislocations be?11:49 am on August 28, 2015