Rotting Drywall

[A discussion about the recent attack at Congresswoman Gifford's rally. A friend submitted an op-ed piece to a local newspaper. He distributed said piece among some of us at work. This is my imaginary conversation about the thesis of that piece. I paraphrased his work - rather than quoting it fully.]

Steve: This country's culture of incivility contributed to the tragic shooting at the Congresswoman Gifford's rally on January 9, 2011. Our leaders should repudiate both violence and the incivility that incites it.

Swami: So this guy, the shooter, wasn't at fault? He's not responsible for what he did?

Steve: Yes, he is responsible.

Swami: Then the culture isn't relevant. He is responsible - only his actions and motivations are relevant.

Steve: No, the culture shares responsibility. It had an influence.

Swami: The same culture influences me, in the same strength that it influenced him. If culture is partly responsible, then why haven't I committed the same acts? Why hasn't everyone?

Steve: The culture has a different affect on different people.

Swami: Ah, so he's not responsible - the culture's affect on him is responsible.

Steve: No, no, he does bear some of the responsibility.

Swami: You just said that a different culture would have prevented this tragedy. Therefore, the culture is THE factor that caused it. If its absence would prevent it, then its presence caused it.

Steve: There are many factors that all contribute. Any one of them missing would have prevented this tragedy.

Swami: That's my point - he is not responsible because he does not control all of these external factors. You absolved him of personal responsibility for his actions.

Steve: I believe in personal responsibility. And the shooter does have some in this situation.

Swami: You can't have some personal responsibility. If you only have some responsibility, then you really have no responsibility. Again, the blame lays on the factors outside of your control. That's my whole point. This idea of shared responsibility merely covers a denial of personal responsibility. Syndrome, in the movie The Incredibles, says and when everyone is super, no one will be. Spread abnormality around enough and it becomes normal. Spread responsibility around enough and you blame everyone else.

This appears as the central tenet in almost every discussion: the shooter isn't the one to blame. I contend that he is the ONLY person to blame. He chose his own actions. And he chose them in accordance to his character.

This man already decided his value of human life. He willfully chose what actions he would consider right, and which were wrong. He measured his actions against the things that mattered most to him. He patterned his life around his selected values. He structured the world around him so that this outcome became inevitable. He shaped his world to make this happen. So yes, he is solely responsible.

Steve: Now wait a minute - you're saying that it's someone's own fault if they are depressed? We know scientifically that some people cannot control themselves. They have medical conditions that require medication to control. Your argument is fallacious.

Swami: So medication has a 100% success rate?

Steve: No, but so what?

Swami: What if depression has two components: physical and spiritual? By spiritual I mean intangibles such as attitude or character. Medication can only fix physical problems. Success or failure in treating depression relies on addressing both aspects. That's why even medicated people still visit a psychiatrist.

So the question becomes: does the physical or spiritual part of our nature control our actions? I think we can both agree that the human spirit causes physical actions. In other words, your spirit causes your actions.

The spirit controls the manner in which depression manifests itself. You can't choose to stop being depressed. You can choose to seek help. You can choose to follow the doctor's recommendations (or not).

The shooter made choices that brought with them consequences. He set in motion a death spiral culminating in what happened January 9, 2011. Changing external factors (e.g. the culture) would only influence the form of his expression, not the fact of it.

The culture, civil or not, did not cause this tragedy. A man's character and values caused it. "Fixing" the culture is like painting over rotten drywall.