tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post6682118266082040851..comments2023-04-03T05:20:01.318-04:00Comments on Young, Hip and Conservative: a skeptical blog: What's wrong with politicizing a tragedy?Michaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00427964335321253510noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post-72374910894187278302012-12-27T00:19:35.086-05:002012-12-27T00:19:35.086-05:00I think there is something in the idea that you sh...I think there is something in the idea that you shouldn't use these kinds of things just to promote your political cause. But I think these sorts of tragedies as much spur people to make their arguments as they provide them with a case to base their arguments on, and accusing other people of politicizing a tragedy can be just as cynical as politicizing it in the first place.<br /><br />Honestly, this gun-control debate is such a stale-mate, and you have to endorse so many hypotheticals to make your case on either side, that I can't support it either way.<br /><br />I am concerned about the number of shootings and so forth. It just seems like there have been so many in the past year, and I can't believe it's just because they're so blown out of proportion. If there were people fighting for money or even liberals and conservatives gunning each other down in the streets, that would be comprehensible -- but that people in America just go and shoot innocent bystanders for no reason, and that they do it more and more is alarming and befuddling. Even suicide bombings make more sense than this.<br /><br />But appealing to psychiatry and so forth seems like another red herring. I very much doubt we have a good enough understanding of human pyschology to figure out what is causing this. So it's just like being in the middle of a thunder-storm, and everyone argues about where to stand, but know one knows where or why the next bolt is going to strike...firezdoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11473050286104950159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1279973426476621559.post-59349461193783161622012-08-02T09:30:11.785-04:002012-08-02T09:30:11.785-04:00The best-known tragedies are by default political ...The best-known tragedies are by default political because they have indirect social or economic consequences which change how people relate to one another. Events don't exist in isolation. If we want to *prevent* tragedies like that from occurring in the future, it <i>has</i> to be politicized. There's no other way around it. But that doesn't mean we <i>have</i> to disagree on solutions to these issues, as the article you cited seems to imply. Preventative solutions come through talking about the problem civilly. People seem to reject politicizing issues because it's "partisan". But no one disagrees that the tragedy could have been prevented. Where you place that burden is the issue. I wonder how it could be 'partisan' if those differences existed beforehand, and not without good reason. It's just rhetoric.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14668524622930233382noreply@blogger.com