Pay attention to non-violence
Reply
Author Archives: Matthew Bradley
Do free societies suffer tragedies?
On Twitter Politico quotes from a statement issued by President Obama in response to a shooting at a public event held by Representative Giffords, which has claimed many casualties including the Congresswoman (her prognosis is reported to be surprisingly positive, having suffered a gunshot to her head) and at least a few fatalities among them as I draft this.
@politico: #Obama:
Such a senseless and terrible act of violence has no place in a free societyhttp://politi.co/fQmggR
What does that mean? Assuming even the best of intentions, does that sentiment mean much in the context of remarks from a contemporary President of the United States?
In trying to give those words meaning, these questions come to mind:
What does that imply about society? I don’t take it for granted that we live in a free one, if that was an implied premise.
Do I even agree with the statement? What does a free society need to endure, lest it stop being free?
I think we must consider the idea that a free society is going to have to accept some level of tragedy. We also need to consider how much tragedy is a function of an unfree society. I’m not sure the most vocal people who seize podiums and microphones want a free society or even understand what they want.
In the service…
I walk to work. My commute takes me from up on the hill that much of Northwest DC sits on down to the canyon of K Street and the minor ravines of adjacent streets and offices.
On mornings when I have not bothered with earbuds I am sometimes conscious of the clacking sounds of the hard-soled shoes of my fellow white collar walkers.
Some days I liken this cacophony to a herd of cattle: a somewhat disorganized but driven behavior.
Other times I identify the syncopated crunch of jackboots. A regiment of young lobbyists, lawyers and their professional support staff marching in crisp uniforms to battle, beating back free thought in the service of other interests, while preserving a vocabulary to describe what they do as good. Making words less valuable at great expense seems to be the primary result.