Mass Shootings as Part and Parcel of Representative Government

Shane Eide

October 4th, 2017


One of the most popular phrases in our cultural climate,  which could surely compete with many others for the number one spot, is 'echo chamber.' It is the go-to criticism of an exhausted narrative. All official narratives are exhaustive by nature, but they seem far more exhausting when you don't happen to buy them. The fact that the word 'narrative' has even entered our daily vocabulary speaks to the truth which is often forgotten; that history itself is an echo chamber.

  'Historical revisionism' is, essentially, a pejorative phrase used to beat would-be seekers of alternative information down before they can even begin to challenge consensus reality. A lot of what we see happening today is the war of moral imperatives lying behind the narratives being told. When one refers to oneself as a 'free thinker' or a 'truth seeker,' beware... This simply means they'll keep looking until they can find the one detail which best suits their prejudices or the version of reality they most favor so they can exalt it above all other conclusions. People are aware that it is the moving parts of a configuration which grants one the most power.

  Mimetic violence carries its own uncanny propensity to incite in people some of the most deleterious forms of emotional and psychological manipulation in order to see their ends met. In cases like the mass shooting in Vegas, now estimated to be one of the worst in the nation's history, a series of reactions and counter reactions can always be expected. The Left always takes a minute to signal their virtue and holiness by talking megalomaniacally  about how much the event personally affects them and disrupts their day, and before they can even fully let this breath exit their mouths, they use the event to demonize their opposing political constituency. It doesn't matter if the weapons involved in the shooting were illegal or not because that's never the real point.

  The Left is often not given enough credit in the role they play in these endless narrative quibbles. The Right is often outraged that liberals just can't seem to get it through their heads that only criminals would have guns if you outlawed guns. Though this makes semantic, linear sense, they overlook the revolutionary nature of the Left. It's more about controlling who has guns than it is about ending violence. The Left, throughout history, has seldom shown any hesitation in seizing hold of weapons the moment it suits their cause, regardless of the laws in place, which, strangely, means that they have a much more realistic and perhaps machiavellian approach to the second ammendment than the Right does. The Right, suffering from their deluded love for both order and what they curiously see as its bedfellow, small government, often dupe themselves into playing a game no one was ever meant to win, continuing to vote in people who promise to protect their family values and businesses, resolving themselves to fold their arms and pout when the rigged game falls only to the favor of the state.

  Whether it's Jimmy Kimmel crying late night followed by a plea to up gun control, or Trump virtue-signaling that he'll protect the LGBTQ community after the Orlando shooting, the game is all about power. The state benefits no matter which narrative is emphasized, as the Right always supports funding for an increasingly policed state and the Left demoralizes whoever doesn't live and breathe in their schizophrenic, utopian world.

  People love shootings like the one that happened in Vegas. Would Michael Moore be anything but a curmudgeonly penguin director of boring documentaries if it wasn't for the Columbine shooting he is endlessly profiting from, and around which a whole coalition of Hollywood liberals can orbit in order to play radical? Whether it's disturbed loners in Oregon, a mentally unstable college student in Colorado, a white man in a black church, or a disappointed Bernie Sanders supporter, the outcome is never enough, there is always a narrative that can benefit someone, and the subsequent tensions always mean that our daily lives will be made more miserable, whether because of our peers, the police, the ATF, the bots in our phones and computers, or the endless circuses that take place via social media.

  When these events take place, one is tempted to think in terms of conspiracy. ISIS claiming every isolated murder spree does seem a bit fishy. Conspiracies certainly take place, but the important thing to remember is that the biggest conspiracy may just be taking place on a demiurgic level, which is to say, even the people at the very top of any given power scheme aren't fully aware of the configuration they're involved in, as the forces of history in which they find themselves in the middle are far too large, have too many complex parts and are moving far too fast for them to do anything but move in the direction that the current is already moving. While from our position, we often think that power in our world is proud and self seeking, we take for granted that modern power schemes are rife with paranoia and fear. I'm certain that most western elites legitimately think they're doing the right thing or reacting to situations correctly, no matter how neurotic and coercive the results may be. The reason this fear is so pervasive is because, deep down, they know that the pieces of paper they signed and the court oaths they took have no actual substance in the way of tangible power. Deep down they know that they have not earned the persuasion they have over the volume of people they accountable to. That is why politicians in parliamentary and republic democracies are never allowed to show true charisma and character, for if they did, they would alienate the very people they need to help them keep and expand their power. They are constantly trying to appeal to whatever emotional and moral projection their constituency puts on them, and both pay an enormous price. I don't think Bernie Sanders was any more happy that the shooter, Stephen Paddock, was a Bernie supporter than Trump was saddened that his victims were, statistically, more than likely Trump supporters.

  In a world where part and parcel of politics is representation, to such a degree that we are made to feel personally responsible for our candidates and morally obligated to uphold their vision of the world, democracy will always be an endless horror show. Paddock probably saw Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump as vehicles by which he could glorify himself whilst burning up in the prye of his own personal sacrifice. Representative government is built on accelerating cultural antagonism. The shooting was not an aberration in our otherwise peaceful way of life, but the unfortunate psychological result of a system that has violence as the constitutive event of its birth and the perpetual motion of its life.