It’s something of a “new normal” here — as it is around the nation. No longer are just books under fire, but also the library administrators, teachers and long-beloved librarians who are defending them. They’re being shouted down by parents, vilified on billboards, reported to the police, and trolled online, leaving many fearing for their safety.
“I had an actual death threat,” says Livingston Parish school librarian Amanda Jones, her voice breaking as she recalls one particular post: “We know where you work + live….u have a LARGE target on ur back. Click… Click… See you soon.”
Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about the guns. How the ubiquity of guns in the US, and the willingness of people to turn them on others over perceived infractions, cedes control of our society to an authoritarian group. We live under the sufferance of those who believe that might makes right, and will not hesitate to use violence in support of their aims.
Look at the right-wing adulation of Kyle Rittenhouse, who brought a rifle to a protest and killed two people when they tried to protect others from the danger he presented. He became a conservative hero, the epitome of the conservative ideal of free speech: that wielding guns — implicitly threatening others with death or harm — is protected free speech more important than anyone else’s.
A gun is speech the same way money is: it isn’t. Speech can’t kill.
Though our protections against suppression of free speech are limited to the government, we pretend it’s a cultural value of the United States. Yet guns suppress free speech by making death the risk of speech. They grant the wielder power and status by making them judge and jury for society. Carrying a gun in public is their assertion that they need not listen to anyone else, but everyone else had better listen to them. Yes, they will make you.
How can we pretend our society supports free speech when a shop owner can be murdered for flying a Pride flag? How can we pretend to have free speech when anyone with a gun must be considered too risky to contradict?
I recognize that not everyone carrying a gun would murder me over a disagreement, but there’s no way to tell who is reasonable and who believes killing someone with beliefs they find immoral will make them a hero. Right wing terrorists and solo shooters convey additional power to anyone armed in public, lending credence to their threat through the reminders of violence. A lethal weapon elevates the social position of its wielder, its chilling effects on speech and assembly a benefit — they want anyone who disagrees to shut up, stay home, and let them win. Bullying, in this case, works.
Who can we ask to risk their life against those willing to murder in the name of control? Underpaid librarians and teachers?
But if no one dares resist, this faction will destroy the United States utterly.
See also:
6 replies on “Controlling American society through a reign of terror”
Replied to The plot thickens: The battle over books comes at a cost (npr.org) It’s something of a “new normal” here — as…
Bookmarked Why Right-Wingers Are So Afraid of Men Eating Vegetables (The New Republic) The obsession with bugs, though, perfectly encapsulates the insipid but…
Liked Maybe Not the Sports Technologies You Were Expecting by Audrey Watters (Second Breakfast) As a writer about and critic of education technology, I was…
Stories provide a scaffold for understanding When I read non-fiction, I’m less interested in learning facts than gaining understanding (though sometimes facts support the understanding).…
During WWII, the United States government incarcerated over one hundred thousand Americans because they were of Japanese descent, two-thirds of them American citizens. Their bank…
[…] normal to address gun violence by blaming mental health but not increasing funding to expand […]