The level of anger within society seems to be constantly rising and we don’t seem to have any real concerns, or if we do, any way of inquiring into it, much less finding a solution.

In the Toronto area, seemingly random shootings and other acts of violence no longer surprise us, unless they are particularly extreme or someone famous is involved.  We’ve had a couple of those recently – the Ontario ex-Attorney General killing the bicycle courier gone amok; the bus passenger torching an expensive hybrid bus at Yonge and Bloor, because someone wouldn’t give him a cigarette.

In the USA, from which we increasingly seem to take our lead, partisan politics has become particularly nasty, with some people openly depicting President Obama in an insulting racist manner.  Town hall meetings are packed by people who are there just to shout down the speakers; Americans are taking to the street for the first time in a long time.  The reason?  Improved, possibly government-backed health care for the ordinary person!!  It is interesting that George W. Bush faced no such reaction when he took America into two wars, using (as has been proven and at the time was being questioned) misleading or false “facts”.  He even escaped censure for using torture… which incidentally enmeshed individual Canadians and the Canadian government.  Many lives were needlessly lost, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan.  No one complained then (or now) about America’s federal military budget, which is larger than health care.

In Canada, Stephen Harper bases his (so far successful) political tactics on the aggressive (sold as “committed” or “passionate”), hard-nosed, Bush-Cheney style and he also takes his policies from them – especially the no government/ no regulation part.  Despite this stance, however, Harper obviously loves the power that comes with government and has shown no reluctance to spend money on his favourite projects and to throw fat consulting contracts and jobs to his supporters.

What can be done?  We need much more compassion and cooperation all around, but way before that, we need to listen to each other with open hearts and open minds. We need to find some deeper meaning and fulfillment in our personal lives… otherwise we just get frustrated and angry, taking it out on the nearest person.  Sounds simplistic, but that is what commonly happens to even the most educated, priveleged and sophisticated.

Unfortunately, we seem to be moving in the other direction, partly driven by technology and the media.  Technology is a tool, but is not completely neutral, since it has definite characteristics, which include complexity. The internet, for example, has both positive and negative aspects.  Among the positive is the ability for the downtrodden to broadcast their plight and for people to network and share information. On the negative side, you have hackers, (child) porn sites, identity theft etc.  In terms of news and even politics, people are encouraged to give their opinions immediately, but what are these opinions worth if there is no introspection or if they are relatively uninformed i.e. people are just spewing out their unexamined biases… republican vs democrat, Christian vs Muslim etc.  If there is too much information or if there is no information, in the end, the result will be the same.  People will just go with what they already feel, albeit unexamined.

Especially since Bush-Cheney, there are signs that in American (and possibly Canadian) politics, an aggressive, partisan, even lying approach is effective.  This is a complex issue, but here are just a few reasons why this is happening.

1. On national TV, most programs invite the two opposing sides to state their case.  If one side is more aggressive, sensational and deceptive, then they tend not to get penalized for their behaviour because the “2-sides” format subconsciously suggests parity and also it is easy for the “nastier” side to find some small, even isolated example to “prove” that the other side does the same thing.  A classic example of this 2-sides effect was the issue of Global Warming.  The vast majority of scientists accepted global warming as a fact, but polls showed that the average person thought that scientists were evenly divided in their opinions. Another continuing example is Fox news, which routinely spews lies and invective with no real backlash or consequence whatsoever.
2. The Republicans started deliberately manipulating public opinion, consciously employing specious and illogical arguments and appealing to emotion rather than logic.  One of their chief strategists and consultants during Bush-Cheney and up to the present is Frank Luntz, who specializes in finding (through focus groups) “hot button issues” – single words or concepts that will trigger people’s emotions and override their logic.  Such words have included “elites”, “socialism”, “communism” and recently in connection with health care, “Washington takeover” or “Government takeover”.  In a recent strategy paper, Luntz advised Republicans to employ 4 strategies: appeal to jingoism/ Americanism; personalize issues ( e.g. Frank the plumber); stay away from facts and adopt misleading slogans; focus on taxation rather than spending; use fear to pass legislation (which has worked so well for them).  There are signs that Harper is also pursuing a similar strategy with his control of the PMO and all statements coming from his ministers.  Stay “on message” with the “hot button”(?) Harper-defined issues.
3. The competitive media market place demands continuous “content”, regardless of relative importance.  This means that the distinction between what is truly important and what is not is blurred.  Life is being trivialized and our attention spans are shrinking….which means we find it harder to distinguish innate Quality in a person (apart from the voice coach, designer, stager, speech writer etc) or issue.  Thus Michael Jackson is much more important (in terms of media coverage) than Obama, Korea, Israel, Iran etc.
4. One of the big political issues in the USA is government control or no government control.  The biggest winners in the no-control game are corporations, including media corporations.  Fox is an obvious example, but there are many others.  Do you think if anti-corporation legislation is being passed, the managements of the media corporations are going to idly stand by?  Do you think that if a giant advertiser (say a corporation like Monsanto) is being investigated by some of its journalists for questionable conduct, the management of a media corporation won’t step in and squash the investigation?

As I said, this is a complex issue and I could go on, as I have done in my book, “Ageless Wisdom Spirituality: Investing in Human Evolution”.  I would welcome feedback and if any readers want to take these matters further.

Andy James

PS  A major contributor to violence not mentioned above (it’s a vast subject by itself) is the impact of the Entertainment industry and popular culture: movies, TV, print media, music, video games and the internet.  From a very early age, we expose our children to violence (and also sex, often perverted) as a form of entertainment, so it shouldn’t be surprising that we see it enacted on our streets and in our homes.  Studies have shown that exposure to violent images does increase our own violent tendencies and the effect is stronger is there is interaction, as in video games.