Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

madamesilverspurs

(15,801 posts)
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 01:14 PM Nov 2015

"You are responsible for your wake."

"You are responsible for your wake."

Who is responsible for the shootings in Colorado Springs?

When I was a kid, I saw a sign on a lake that made an incredible impression on me. To this day, I think about that sign: "You are responsible for your wake."

In boating, "wake" refers to the waves created as a boat travels across water. Smaller craft my be capsized and inexperienced swimmers may drown in the wake of larger boats. Boat operators are legally responsible for that damage.

The same rule should apply to politics and news organizations. If you use misleading propaganda to vilify a specific group or to raise funds for your campaign, then you are responsible for your wake. When your words encourage or support the ideology of groups or individuals associated with domestic terrorism, then you are responsible. When you imply or state outright that Second Amendment Solutions are appropriate, then you are responsible for the violence that occurs when people take your words to heart. When you intentionally empower people who hate, you are responsible for the actions that follow.

If you don't condemn it, then you condone it.

Yesterday was an act of terrorism. If you doubt that, then imagine how Fox News would have covered the event if the shooter had been a Muslim. Or an immigrant. Or, for that matter, if he had been Black.

The Right says that we shouldn't talk about guns in the aftermath of something like yesterday's terrorist attack. Fine, if you don't want to talk about guns, then let's talk about domestic terrorism and who is behind it. Let's talk about who incites these attacks.

Let's talk about being responsible for your wake.

https://www.facebook.com/bobseay
42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"You are responsible for your wake." (Original Post) madamesilverspurs Nov 2015 OP
K&R etherealtruth Nov 2015 #1
It's the Butterfly Effect Action_Patrol Nov 2015 #2
I was thinking about this just now. With Obama's statement. The ownership has got to be the people seabeyond Nov 2015 #3
Stochastic terrorism. Scuba Nov 2015 #4
Exactly my words. Thanks for saying it first, Scuba. nt Hekate Nov 2015 #8
That's a good analogy. cwydro Nov 2015 #5
This analogy is really good. ms liberty Nov 2015 #6
Very well put, thanks for this post! haikugal Nov 2015 #7
+1 n/t ejbr Nov 2015 #10
Well said, and highly apropos... Wounded Bear Nov 2015 #9
Agree 100% SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #15
By that logic... gregcrawford Nov 2015 #19
Surely you can see the difference SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #20
hard to follow your logic Sick... icarusxat Nov 2015 #21
If you truly can't see the difference SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #22
It can be a bit confusing: JoeyT Nov 2015 #30
Exactly SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #31
The analogy is a bit flawed. It's too "coincidental". FourScore Nov 2015 #42
I am thinking of The Donald... gregcrawford Nov 2015 #27
Define "indictable hate speech" SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #32
A person... deathrind Nov 2015 #29
Don't forget Rupert Murdoch and Co. Octafish Nov 2015 #11
Billo? shadowmayor Nov 2015 #12
k and r niyad Nov 2015 #13
k&r brer cat Nov 2015 #14
Love that term KT2000 Nov 2015 #16
K&R valerief Nov 2015 #17
Thank You For Sharing These Truths cantbeserious Nov 2015 #18
Excellent OP malaise Nov 2015 #23
Your analogy is easy to grasp. Duval Nov 2015 #24
Yes. Good analogy. FailureToCommunicate Nov 2015 #25
When Timothy McVeigh blew up the Oklahoma City federal building, it was widely accepted that tblue37 Nov 2015 #26
While we fight for the right to free speech passiveporcupine Nov 2015 #38
Fear, Lies, Hate n/t tom_kelly Nov 2015 #28
Great OP, thanks. dae Nov 2015 #33
K & R!!! Thespian2 Nov 2015 #34
Great analogy. Thank you. nt SusanCalvin Nov 2015 #35
Succinct and... 3catwoman3 Nov 2015 #36
K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Nov 2015 #37
Yes, this!! K&R nt riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #39
K&R So many fully funded crazies running around these days. raouldukelives Nov 2015 #40
Easy, RWNJ are responsible. lark Nov 2015 #41
 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
3. I was thinking about this just now. With Obama's statement. The ownership has got to be the people
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 01:25 PM
Nov 2015

that feed this hate.

I was reading replies to an article about the killings. Too many people dismissed the deaths without consideration to stand on their anti abortion high ground. The rhetoric has created this.

Wounded Bear

(58,651 posts)
9. Well said, and highly apropos...
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 01:46 PM
Nov 2015

"Free speech" prevents a legal/legislative cure, but more people have to get this message and take it to heart.

The only cure is for people to turn away from and refuse support for those who generate such "wakes" as they plow through the marina of life. Unfortunately, there is a vast contingent of people in this country so inured to hate speech from their own "side" that they can no longer see the connections.

SickOfTheOnePct

(7,290 posts)
15. Agree 100%
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 02:10 PM
Nov 2015

I would in no way favor criminal charges, but effectively shunning them, both privately and business wise? Absolutely.

gregcrawford

(2,382 posts)
19. By that logic...
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 02:56 PM
Nov 2015

... Charles Manson should never have been charged for the murders of Sharon Tate and friends. He didn't kill them, but he incited his followers to do it. Incitement to riot, and incitement to commit murder are punishable offenses. So I have to disagree with you on this one.

SickOfTheOnePct

(7,290 posts)
20. Surely you can see the difference
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 03:00 PM
Nov 2015

between a cult leader that has close, daily, intimate contact with followers whom he orders to murder others and loudmouths on radio and TV.

Invalid comparison.

icarusxat

(403 posts)
21. hard to follow your logic Sick...
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 03:18 PM
Nov 2015

the sad and sorry followers of hate radio believe they are best buds with Rush and his ilk. The way the media pretends that only the right wing exists provides the true believers with the daily, intimate contact they need to satisfy the comparison given...

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
30. It can be a bit confusing:
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 07:51 PM
Nov 2015

If I come up to you and say "icarusxat, my good buddy, do you remember that guy that lives down the road? Brandon Notarealname? Yeah, he's been a thorn in our side for too long. I want you to take this gun and kill that son-of-a-bitch." you're guilty of what Manson is guilty of.

If I come up to you and say "icarusxat, don't you know Brandon Notarealname? Yeah, that guy's a real prick. I hope he dies." It'd be an opinion that was protected by the 1st, but I'd still be morally responsible if you killed the dude, especially if I said it to you hundreds of times a day, and had everyone else saying it to you over and over. That's where anti-abortion groups are now.

Morally, they're culpable. I know it, you know it, Sick knows it. Everyone knows it. No one that isn't one of them is going to deny they're 100% to blame for this, but we also all know that there's no real way to prosecute them for it.

FourScore

(9,704 posts)
42. The analogy is a bit flawed. It's too "coincidental".
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 12:42 PM
Nov 2015

In Nazi Germany, the people only had one radio station, and it was, of course, owned and operated by the Nazi Party. So the people only heard Nazi propaganda and nothing else. After the war, Germany enacted some very strict anti-hate laws. For example, in Germany, the Nazi party or the KKK would never be allowed to march in a parade, like they do in NYC - because the sole purpose of the group is hate and discrimination. In America, they're allowed. When I lived in Germany, I argued about the slippery slope of who determines what is hate and what isn't, and how allowing such hate groups their freedom is the negative side of free speech, and all the other "noble" arguments of allowing hate to flaunt itself. But, I always felt like I was losing that battle, because of course people know hate when they see it, and it is dangerous.

Hate can be identified. Propaganda is the most useful method of propagating hate. It is a relentless drumbeat of false information and hateful, imbalanced rhetoric. Everyone knows who the hate groups are in a parade, everyone knows when a news organization or radio personality is promoting hate. It needs to be defined and somehow held accountable. I think it needs to be stopped.

gregcrawford

(2,382 posts)
27. I am thinking of The Donald...
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 05:37 PM
Nov 2015

... and the thugs he sicced on the BLM protester. But Fux News has skirted indictable hate speech more than once, and distance, be it a hundred feet or a hundred miles, does not excuse those fomenting hatred and violence. Radio personalities in Rwanda were tried and convicted for inciting Hutus to slaughter Tutsis. Or was it Tutsis killing Hutus, I don't remember, but whatever; People like that should never be able to light the fuse of lethal violence with incendiary rhetoric and then just walk away.

deathrind

(1,786 posts)
29. A person...
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 07:40 PM
Nov 2015

Walks into a theater and yells fire when there is not one. 3 people die from the ensuing stamped should that person not be held accountable. He was not a cult leader and was a stranger to all. Granted there is a more direct line in the cause an affect of my analogy but none the less...people died.

shadowmayor

(1,325 posts)
12. Billo?
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 01:58 PM
Nov 2015

The whole "Tiller the baby killer" BS should be hung around Billo's neck for the rest of his miserable days.

tblue37

(65,340 posts)
26. When Timothy McVeigh blew up the Oklahoma City federal building, it was widely accepted that
Sat Nov 28, 2015, 04:47 PM
Nov 2015

RW hate speech was a driving force in his choice to commit violence against what he perceived to be a manifestation of the federal government, without concerning himself about "collateral damage" among the innocent--not even the babies and toddlers in the onsite daycare:



For a short (all too short!) time afterward, a few of the hateful public mouthpieces kept their heads down and tempered their ugly rhetoric. I doubt they felt any guilt or shame, but they knew others held them at least partly responsible, so they acted to protect themselves until the furor died down.

Now, though, they have no shame at all, no sense of their own responsibility, and no one seems willing to call them out about it--except, of course, for us totally dismissed and discounted "dirty f***ing hippies" on the left. When Dr. George Tiller was murdered, Bill O'Reilly never once conceded that repeatedly, incessantly, calling him "Tiller the baby killer" on his show might have provoked his murderer and prompted the man's decision to shoot Dr. Tiller.

Unless the M$M decides to connect the dots for the public, the RW hate speech purveyors will escape responsibility this time, too.

Unfortunately, though, I have no hope that the M$M will do the right thing.

Don't forget, though, that the radio broadcast of hate speech was what led the Hutus in Rwanda to attack and kill 800,000 Tsutsis and their few Hutu associates and supporters. Propaganda that demonizes and dehumanizes opponents as "other" makes it a short step for many people to start considering the possibility of eliminating the "vermin."

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
38. While we fight for the right to free speech
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 02:06 AM
Nov 2015

We have to remember that there are lots of crazy people who will not take, or are not able to take responsibility for their actions. They will stew and rage until they go nuts and kill someone. Because this is a social truth, with no way to stop it, incendiary language, that encourages whackos to do evil things, needs to have some kind of penalty.

I don't want anyone or everyone to have to worry about anything they say, but people in public places like politicians, news, leaders, radio hosts, preachers, all need to take responsibility for their speech, when it is used to incite hatred and violence. Even if they "never really meant it"...Bull Shit they didn't. Maybe they never meant for someone to be killed because of it, but they did mean to stir up the hatred and fear.

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
40. K&R So many fully funded crazies running around these days.
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 09:40 AM
Nov 2015

All branching out from corporations willing to give money to anyone who is willing to help them defraud us, demoralize us or demonize us.

It's like I always say about Wall St. One small ripple today in it today is quite potentially devastating to any democracy, any progress and any life that the tiniest liberal soul desires.

We are responsible for our wakes.

lark

(23,099 posts)
41. Easy, RWNJ are responsible.
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 12:23 PM
Nov 2015

In trying to gin up some social conservative righteous indignation, they completely lied and misrepresented the facts and now people have died as a result. Of course they won't acknowledge this, saying it's too soon, have to wait, etc. etc. trying to bury the facts that they are responsible. They created these conditions and they should be held accountable for fomenting domestic terrorism.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"You are responsible...