Validating Violence

Some regular readers may recall that I resolved, after the COVID lockdowns, to see more live music. Which I have. Among the acts I’ve seen in what has grown into a lifestyle (129 shows since March 2022) is the rock band Styx, which has been splendid both times, and which still has a couple original/classic lineup members. Among them is guitarist/singer Tommy Shaw, who at 72 still sounds amazing and who, decades back when Opie and Anthony were on satellite radio, absolutely floored me playing solo acoustic version of Fooling Yourself on their show.

Fooling Yourself, in case you don’t know the song, is about the stereotypical Angry Young Man. The stereotype emerged in 1950s Britain, and has been a cultural trope across the ensuing decades. The punk movement is particularly notable, and many other songs reference the trope Yes, Billy Joel, I remember yours, but I also remember Rage Against The Machine’s Zach De La Rocha muttering sotto voce “anger is a gift” in Freedom. I will also tip my hat to Holden Caulfield here, despite being unimpressed with that book (I probably read it decades too late for it to resonate).

The Angry Young Man vents his frustrations and disillusionment at society, of course; if he were simply pissed off at parents or siblings, no one would care. Every generation has its Angry Young Men, which tells us it’s a human-nature phenomenon rather than being born of particular cultural conditions. Were the Duke brothers betting on this instead of Billy Ray and Louis, Mortimer would have won.

The Angry Young Man phenomenon correlates with the affinity for socialism, as we’ve seen time and again in support for that political ideology. The aphorism that begins with “If you’re not a socialist when you’re young, you have no heart,” affirms the correlation, and strongly suggests the conclusion that socialism is at its core an emotional ideology.

That’s not a great leap of insight. The telltales are endless. Any look at socialist ideas finds envy (masquerading as “fairness”), resentment, pride (as in, the ego it takes to believe they can get it right when it has gone wrong every previous time), hatred for “other,” and empathy (for some, but not for others). Socialists are born from the heart. But, as the aphorism concludes, (if you’re still a socialist when you’re old, you have no head) not from the brain.

Despite the countless academics that attempt, to this day, to rationalize socialism, it is not an ideology that works in the real world. It has failed everywhere and every when. The academics “succeed” only because their ideas exist apart from reality. In their world, the theories only need to make sense to other theorizers. With one exception, but hold that thought for a moment.

Consider, now, another emotion-based phenomenon that has gained cultural traction in recent years. The notion that hurt feelings legitimize state intervention is a lot newer than that of the Angry Young Man. Today, in a culture where free speech is protected and supposed to be paramount, a growing number of people believe that saying or writing the wrong things should be prohibited. That using certain expletives or the wrong pronouns, disrespecting (one particular) religion, or expressing the wrong political views justifies prosecution. Nothing validates “my feelings are hurt!” more than the offender being fined, fired, deplatformed, booted off campus, or hauled away by jackbooted goons. The last is a daily occurrence over in the UK, by the way.

Worse yet, in instances where the government doesn’t act, more and more young people believe that they or their team can take matters into their own hands. One survey reports that one young person in three believes political violence is justifiable.

Combine a belief that hurt feelings justify a physical response and the connection between emotion and socialism, and we get to where we are today, with the Left routinely engaging in political violence even as their apologists point fingers at everyone else.

Which brings us to the one exception I mentioned above. Socialism has proven to be very effective at doing one thing: accruing power to those at the top of the political food chain. Socialism works very well for those at the top of the government power pyramid. That this has never led to any of the promises that socialists make to the masses goes unnoticed, of course. So, no surprise that leaders with aspirations to unbridled power fan the already-hot emotional flames of young people with promises of retribution, largesse from the treasury, and cost-free fulfillment of their empathic leanings.

As to the last, it’s maddening that so many people have been conditioned to believe themselves charitable or good-hearted when they give away that which others created and earned and toiled for. You may think yourself a good person when you vote to tax others so that the government can help those you have decided deserve it, but you are nothing more than an enslaver when you do so.

Used to be, political violence was the near-exclusive purview of radical revolutionaries, people on the fringes who figured the only path to their preferred political structure was violence and destruction. Now that people have been taught that their personal emotional responses and hurt feelings are “valid,” that they have the right to demand others affirm them without question or rebuttal, we shouldn’t be surprised that a growing mainstream is cool with acts of violence up to and including assassination.