roachboy

dunedan-----the far right has **chosen** to construct a political rhetoric that makes gun-related imagery one of its central features---and has **chosen** to frame inter-political contestation in terms of gun-related violence. there's not any debate about this.

no-one is saying that rhetoric like this makes anyone do things---but it does normalize certain linkages symbolically and that normalization **can** be an element, and in some cases a central element, in particular decisions to act violently. another way: you play with neo-fascist language you produce a climate in which violence like this is not surprising---even if it does not allow one to say that at moment x actor 1 will engage in action a.

similarly, a rhetoric that does not frame political contestation with the imagery of gun-related violence would work against these same decisions---but obviously wouldn't prevent them from happening.

but the rub is (well, one of them so far as we know now)....given the people who were shot/killed, and given what's now available thats attributed to this guy, it's obvious that even if laughton is a wingnut, he's a wingnut who frames his own actions in the language of the tea party. so in that respect, you reap what you sow. you can't control who uses the discourse.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite