Editorial: Rhetoric of violence must be reined in

Sarah Palin's political action committee drew cross-hairs over democrats, including Gabrielle Giffords. Photo / Supplied

Opinion

It would be dangerous to instantly suggest that the shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was the product of a poisoned political climate in the United States.

It could be that the attempted assassin was mentally unstable, rather than being motivated by hatred. Equally, the incident is not unusual in a country that, throughout its history, has witnessed the killings of several presidents.

Nonetheless this shooting has, rightly, prompted a bout of soul-searching. Whatever caused Jared Lee Loughner to shoot indiscriminately into a crowd at a Tucson political gathering, there is no doubt he was acting in a highly inflamed atmosphere.

Not since the 1960s, when civil rights and the Vietnam War aroused heated debate, has the United States been so divided. Not since then have there been so many threats and violence against leading politicians.

As always, polarisation encourages extreme acts. The situation makes a mockery of President Barack Obama's campaign pledge to bring Americans together.

There would, he said, be "no red states or blue states, just the United States". Virtually from the start, however, his Republican opponents refused to buy into that quest for harmony. Their approach has solidified following their success in last November's mid-term congressional elections.

Much of the impetus and backbone behind the Republicans' implacability has come from the anti-government Tea Party movement, in cahoots with a number of right-wing television shock-jocks.

Their vitriol, repeated loudly and relentlessly, has reinforced and enlarged prejudices. It has also introduced a standard of political discourse that is often bizarre to New Zealand ears.

Many Americans have, for example, been persuaded that they should question President Obama's place of birth and religion. Others have been led to conclude that he is a Marxist bent on fundamentally transforming their freedoms and way of life.

Worst of all, much of this assault has been couched in violent imagery. Sarah Palin, the failed Republican vice-presidential candidate and darling of the Tea Party, has urged her supporters, "Don't retreat - instead reload".

Her Facebook account once featured a map with bullseye symbols over the constituencies of Gabrielle Giffords and other Democrats. With remarkable foresight, the congresswoman noted that, "when people do that, they've got to realise that there are consequences to that action". The same must be said for Democrats who have been guilty of using the same symbolism.

One way or another, a tragedy has been waiting to happen. Gabrielle Giffords drew the wrath of conservatives by supporting President Obama's healthcare reform law. Last year, her offices were vandalised.

This week the newly installed Republican majority in the House of Representatives was to vote to repeal that very law. Political tension was high.

Now, however, that vote and all other legislative activities have been suspended. Members of Congress should use the opportunity to consider how to take some heat out of the atmosphere.

This will be achieved if the most strident politicians and shock-jocks take a step back and accept they have been guilty of excesses.

Political rhetoric ceases to be responsible when it is deliberately calculated to mislead and malign. It can, and should, be reined back to something more reasoned and moderate.

Vigour and vitality need not be lost in that process. Jared Lee Loughner may or may not have been motivated by words laced with violent imagery. But if that language continues, there will certainly be those who decide to act.