tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35248477.post6289568179710933142..comments2024-03-27T14:20:05.905-04:00Comments on Montclair SocioBlog: Emotional ContagionJay Livingstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06652075579940313964noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35248477.post-85311736250944282302013-11-26T22:52:48.449-05:002013-11-26T22:52:48.449-05:00In the late sixties, in the wake of the assassinat...In the late sixties, in the wake of the assassinations and riots, some historians wrote articles and books reminding Americans of their violent past. Many people dismissed these accounts as mere propaganda from leftist anti-Americans. Ditto for the reaction to H. Rap Brown’s assertion that violence was as American as cherry pie. <br /><br />We can keep all sorts of erroneous ideas in our heads not just because these are more comfortable – it’s nicer to think of the world as a peaceful, predictable place – but because we are rarely confronted with evidence to the contrary. We don’t go around looking for contradictory evidence, and if we do come across such evidence we discount it. So we can carry the image of the US as a safe and peaceful country because most of the time for most of us it is. And every day that is safe and peaceful for me reinforces my belief. <br /><br />Is texting while driving safe? Of course not. Everyone knows that. But people still do it? I would guess that they do it because most of the time, it does not lead to an accident. Each time a person does it without consequence further reinforces the assumption that “I know how to do it safely.” So when the person does crash while texting, it’s a something of a surprise to him, even though it shouldn’t be.<br /><br />It’s only in retrospect that these things become obvious. Once something happens, it’s easy to go back and point to all the things we should have seen. On Monday, I could show you a dozen reasons why it was obvious that the Jaguars were going to beat the Texans. I would feign amazement at how ignorant and self-deluding were all those who bet on Houston or made them a 10-point favorite. As Yogi implied, prediction is much easier about the past.<br /><br />Even after the fact, lots of people resist. In the 60s, many people on the left denied that crime was really increasing. In the 80s and 90s and even later, people on the right were denying that inequality was increasing. In the 2000s, there were housing-bubble deniers, and many people were taken by surprise when the bubble burst. In this decade there are still global-warming deniers. All these erroneous believers had at least some evidence for their positions.Jay Livingstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06652075579940313964noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35248477.post-45127990491707108122013-11-26T18:13:02.852-05:002013-11-26T18:13:02.852-05:00Jay,
I'm not arguing, I'm simply stunned ...Jay,<br /><br />I'm not arguing, I'm simply stunned by the view point.<br /><br /><i>My impression is that by 1963, people who had grown up in the 50s and probably the 40s, 30s, and even 20s felt that the country was different – safer, more civil, less violent</i><br /><br />Race riots, union strikes that included bloodshed, the crime sprees of the "Roaring 20s"...I don't see the country was different, I see naivety. I see denial of reality.<br /><br />Either that or selective editing of history. <br /><br />Few assassinations were ever part of the American experience. We really have a fairly benign and violence free exchange of power in government. However that doesn't mean our country is or ever was free of violence. For me, this is especially hard to understand given the people of the 60s were those who experienced World War 2, the Korea War, lived under the specter of the dawning atomic age. <br /><br /> <br /><i><br />It’s like 9/11. As with JFK, very few people were saying, “Well, of course, what did you expect?” People were stunned. In their mental image of reality, the assumptions that they had, this was something that could just not occur. </i><br /><br />Decades of bombings by Muslim extremists and people were stunned by another -- granted greatly more horrific bombing. The USS Cole, the Beirut barracks, the 1st Attack on the World Trade Center.<br /><br />Can you explain why people are so willing to forget those incidences?<br /><br />I really am not trying to argue your view point as much as trying to understand it in the face of such overwhelming evidence that people are and always have been violent thugs with a thin veneer of civilization on top. <br />Bob S.http://www.3boxesofbs.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35248477.post-77087300374632369102013-11-23T13:33:13.550-05:002013-11-23T13:33:13.550-05:00You’re absolutely right. It’s possible to look bac...You’re absolutely right. It’s possible to look back in our history and see assassinations and other political violence. But when Kennedy was shot, I don’t recall many people saying, “Yeah, not really a surprise.” Yes, we all learned in our history classes about Lincoln and that other guy. But that was history, not part of the continuous American stream we were still floating in. The implied message was that our country was different now. No teacher ever ended the class that day by saying, “And this is still the sort of thing we can expect.” <br /><br />My impression is that by 1963, people who had grown up in the 50s and probably the 40s, 30s, and even 20s felt that the country was different – safer, more civil, less violent. Assassinations were just not part of their experience. The Kennedy assassination changed that. When the next assassinations came – MLK, Malcolm, RFK – people were horrified but not so surprised. <br /><br />It’s like 9/11. As with JFK, very few people were saying, “Well, of course, what did you expect?” People were stunned. In their mental image of reality, the assumptions that they had, this was something that could just not occur. Only in retrospect, can you go back and – to use the metaphor so common at the time – connect the dots.<br /><br />People who grew up in the 60s may never have had that rosy naivete regarding assassinations. If someone tried to assassinate Obama, I doubt that many people would be stunned or even surprised.Jay Livingstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06652075579940313964noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35248477.post-91184021311548084332013-11-22T11:42:26.284-05:002013-11-22T11:42:26.284-05:00In the world I had taken for granted, presidents d...<i>In the world I had taken for granted, presidents did not get assassinated. Now that assumption was shattered. </i><br /><br />I'm not trying to be rude or discourteous but I have to ask about this.<br /><br />Given the history of the country in particular and the world in general regarding assassination of world leaders; why would you take it for granted?<br /><br />While our country has been less prone to assassination then many; our history has several, including the Lincoln Assassination which <b>no child </b>could make it through school with learning about.<br /><br />I was 6 months old when Kennedy was killed so much of the mystic or impact...not sure those are the right words...did effect me like I see in so many others. Bob S.http://www.3boxesofbs.comnoreply@blogger.com