A little history followed, about ethnic separatism and race/ethnicity-based hatred and crime and how it affected my ancestors here in the US. This is so that the Astute Reader -- and even readers less than astute -- will understand that I am not without sympathy for the victims of racial hatred.
Then I just had to make some clarifications regarding the distinction between simile and metaphor so that people will know that while you can call someone an Ass, that doesn't make them actually a Donkey. I pointed out that there are few faster routes to madness than the embracing of Superstition, and actually starting to believe ridiculous and utterly unreal stuff.
I did a long and probably pointless exposition on how I myself am effectively alone in a crowd, and thus somewhat immune to getting caught up in a lot of "mob psychology".
Play this as you read, okay?
"Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers", Firesign Theater.
Back in the Middle Ages, outside of events such as wars and eruptions of the Plague, there wasn't a whole lot to do other than work the fields and go to Mass.
However, every now and then, people's boredom would get the better of them, and their imaginations would run wild in a riot of back-alley whispering, and the next thing you know, it's time for yet-another Witch Hunt.
We who live in the modern day, of course, generally know better than to believe that there are old women sacrificing infants to the devil and then flying around on broomsticks to poison wells and make livestock miscarry, right?
Well, most of we Americans who were raised in the mainstream culture of the United States know better than that.
In most modern public schools, at a fairly young age, we are taught about the history of the Salem Witch Trials.
That is generally enough of an example for most people as to why we have our present system of courts. We have laws which restrain the actions of individuals and we have Constitutions which restrain the actions and powers of the State and of the Federal government.
Yet there is a very powerful force which can run wild in any population. It's frequently observed in one or another degree, yet almost nobody can ever discuss it by giving it its proper name: Moral Panic.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A moral panic is the intensity of feeling expressed by a large population about a specific group of people who appear to threaten the social order at a given time. Stanley Cohen, author of the seminal Folk Devils and Moral Panics (1972), says moral panic occurs when "[a] condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests." Those who start the panic when they fear a threat to prevailing social or cultural values are known by researchers as "moral entrepreneurs", while the people who supposedly threaten the social order are known as "folk devils." Moral panics are by-products of controversies that produce arguments and social tension, or aren't easily discussed as some of these moral panics are taboo to many people. The media have long operated as agents of moral indignation, even if they are not self-consciously engaged in crusading or muckraking. Simply reporting the facts can be enough to generate concern, anxiety or panic.
And who are these so-called "moral entrepreneurs"?
From Wikipedia:
A moral entrepreneur is a person who seeks to influence a group to adopt or maintain a norm. The moral entrepreneur may press for the creation or enforcement of a norm for any number of reasons, altruistic or selfish. [...] [M]oral entrepreneurs fall into roughly two categories: rule creators, and rule enforcers. Rule creators can be seen as moral crusaders, who are concerned chiefly with the successful persuasion of others, but are not concerned with the means by which this persuasion is achieved.
The term "moral entrepreneur" comes from Becker (Becker, Howard S. (1973). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: The Free Press).
Now, I suppose I might be classified as a bit of a "moral entrepreneur", especially over issues such as home-overcrowding, and people who pave their yards and illegally park their work fleets on the paved yards.
However, I don't think that anything I have done rises to the level of "panic". These characteristics would have to be present, and as of now, I haven't managed to motivate any such sequence:
Concern - There must be awareness that the behaviour of the group or category in question is likely to have a negative impact on society.
Hostility - Hostility towards the group in question increases, and they become "folk devils". A clear division forms between "them" and "us".
Consensus - Though concern does not have to be nationwide, there must be widespread acceptance that the group in question poses a very real threat to society. It is important at this stage that the "moral entrepreneurs" are vocal and the "folk devils" appear weak and disorganised.
Disproportionality - The action taken is disproportionate to the actual threat posed by the accused group.
Volatility - Moral panics are highly volatile and tend to disappear as quickly as they appeared due to a wane in public interest or news reports changing to another topic.
Ref: (Ben-Yehuda N; Goode E (1994). Moral panics: the social construction of deviance. Oxford: Blackwell.)
So, who are these "folk devils"? From Wikipedia:
A folk devil is a person or group of people who are portrayed in folklore or the media as outsiders and deviant, and who are blamed for crimes or other sorts of social problems. (compare scapegoat)
The pursuit of folk devils frequently intensifies into a mass movement that is called a moral panic. When a moral panic is in full swing, the folk devils are the subject of loosely organized but pervasive campaigns of hostility through gossip and the spreading of urban legends. The mass media sometimes get in on the act or attempt to create new folk devils to create controversies (see To Catch a Predator). Sometimes the campaign against the folk devil influences a nation's politics and legislation.
According to the Wikipedia article,
Catholics were seen as folk devils; minorities and immigrants have often been seen as folk devils; in the long history of anti-Semitism, which frequently targeted Jews with allegations of dark, murderous practices, such as blood libel; or the Roman persecution of Christians that blamed the military reverses suffered by the Roman Empire on the Christians' abandonment of paganism.
More recent folk devils have included the McCarthyite persecution of alleged Communists; Satanists and allegations of Satanic ritual abuse; blaming video games and violence, Goths, and other youth subcultures or musical genres for the Columbine massacre; racial issues from making either certain races a folk devil or racists themselves; people from certain countries (e.g. Mexico) for problems in the USA, and Islam for terrorism.
Thus, everything from religious differences to fashion choices has been blamed for everything from the collapse of empire to cranky babies, more or less.
But how does this relate to "the New Racism"?
And who, around here, would be the worthy subjects of a good old-fashioned Moral Panic, complete with "disproportionality"?
The Astute Reader will no doubt remember my epic series on the Epic Fail of the "Midtown AA" cult of Sex Gang Children.
I doubt that this got much "disproportionality" and in fact it probably got a huge yawn from anyone who might have actually read it. The so-called "13th step" of seducing newcomers to Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous is an old story; the only thing that should spark any outrage would be fact that a lot of courts order people to join such groups as an alternative to prison, evidently all unawares that the alternative to prison is membership in a pseudo-religion Sex Cult.
Nor does it seem to bother anyone that there is at least one group is prowling the streets of MoCo trying to drive disabled people out of town, or at least out of their taxpayer subsidized rental housing.
Indeed, if you wanted a perfect example of "moral entrepreneurs" inciting a low-key "moral panic" for fun and profit, you probably could not find a better example of such, that is motivated by ideas which are, however despicable, comprehensible as sane.
But what about moral panics among the insane?
And what, exactly, do we call "insane"?
I do believe that I have both held forth on the notion that Superstition is one of the fastest paths to madness, if you want to define madness as believing in the utterly unreal and basing actions in reality on your belief in the unreal. As well, I mentioned that I might try to bring in a motif of the Role Playing Game Shadowrun.
I personally never played Shadowrun, but I once had some housemates who were hardcore players and had collected a lot of the supporting literature and play materials, up to and including fiction based in this fictional "universe" and written by everyone from professional writers to die-hard fans.
As fictional worlds go, fantasy universes in which stories take place, Shadowrun isn't too unbelivable, and that may be the problem. Internally it makes a lot of sense, and where it doesn't make sense, it is made to make sense through the use of the concept of magic.
"Magical Thinking" is something that might or might not be a disorder in and of itself, or perhaps it might be indicative of a greater disorder.
Then again, it might be indicative of a complete lack of education, and of Superstition.
Perhaps two years ago, I was standing around with a friend, and we were talking about sports or politics or something really mundane, and this 40-ish Central American woman walks past with a little boy in tow.
As she passed, she pulled the little boy closer to her, and pointed at us, not too subtly. And then she pinched him, and hissed "Silencio! Vampiros!"
Well, that little boy certainly did hush up quickly... but one must wonder at the particulars of Central American legends and mythologies. Then again, who knows what they'll believe, after all, there was the flap and "moral panic" over the Chupacabra.
When Shadowrun first came out, it was a sort of "cult classic", in limited circulation.
Then as role-playing games gained popularity -- especially as popular video games carried the concept out of books and onto gaming consoles -- Shadowrun became something of a fad.
And why not?
Imagine, if you will, JRR Tolkein's "Lord of the Rings", only with modern or post-modern technology.
The Shadowrun world is cross-genre, incorporating elements of both cyberpunk and urban fantasy. The game is set approximately 60 years in the future of present-day Earth, and includes an account of important events from now until the time of the game. As in many near-future cyberpunk settings, Shadowrun includes advanced computer technology and sophisticated cybernetic implants. Unlike in a purely cyberpunk game, in the Shadowrun world, magic returns in 2011. Among other things, this causes humankind to split into subtypes, and some people take the form of elves, dwarves, orks or trolls. Likewise, some animals turn into the familiar monsters of fantasy, and both monsters and human magicians gain supernatural powers. By the second half of the 21st century, when the game is set, these events are accepted as commonplace.
William Gibson, a very influential and famous writer and a founder of the Cyberpunk school of science fiction, said of Shadowrun:
... when I see things like ShadowRun, the only negative thing I feel about it is that initial extreme revulsion at seeing my literary DNA mixed with elves. Somewhere somebody's sitting and saying 'I've got it! We're gonna do William Gibson and Tolkien!' Over my dead body! But I don't have to bear any aesthetic responsibility for it. I've never earned a nickel, but I wouldn't sue them. It's a fair cop. I'm sure there are people who could sue me, if they were so inclined, for messing with their stuff. So it's just kind of amusing...
It's too bad that Mr Gibson didn't have some sort of royalty arrangements with the publishers of Shadowrun and spin-offs. As wealthy as his work has made him, he'd easily be worth a lot more with income from royalties, if he had them.
After Shadowrun went "mainstream", a lot of parents went into a "moral panic" over the supposed association of role-playing games with teenage and young-adult "weirdness".
This "weirdness" generally took the form of fans wandering around through Real Life, talking about Hit Points, Mage Scores, and the general unfairness of being a Troll in a contest against Elves. Anyone who can't understand any of this needs to go read some Harry Potter novels, or just sit down and talk to your kids.
Fortunately, people frequently outgrow being a fanboy/fangirl. Most people do outgrow it.
Outgrowing fandom means that you have (usually) become fully anchored in reality, or at least can separate reality from unreality. In the modern world, as a rule, education asserts itself and people revert to beings who live day-to-day in a universe of scientific rationales and rational causality.
The same can't be said of people who are either Superstitious, or so strictured in their Faith that they exist in their own alternate reality... or for people who are not obviously dysfunctional, but who are nonetheless -- because of the things they believe in -- effectively insane.
The worry then becomes whether or not they have a lot of friends who are insane in the exact same way, or in ways that are extremely similar.
Mostly there's not a lot to worry about, if the shared madness is something like Shadowrun.
But what if the shared madness is one like that of the Central American woman (see digressive story, above), who's taking her grandchild around the neighborhood to point out the white people as "vampiros"?
Or, perhaps, what of shared madness originating in extremely popular television shows with an immense and loyal fan following?
What if you've got ten or twenty teenage girls in the neighborhood who all think they're Buffy?
Then you would have not merely a teenage girl gang with purses full of pointed sticks, you'd have a teenage girl gang in a moral panic insanely seeking imaginary beings... at the local mall.
Could be worse, I suppose.
Teenage girls grow up, eventually... and most -- if not all -- stop believing crazy things.
But do they stop being in girl gangs?
More to come?
0 comments:
Post a Comment