We hear an awful lot these days about how the violent crime rate has dropped in this country. Yet, in looking at the numbers, the "drop" is really from an insanely high number to just a high number. Our murder rate is higher than nearly all other developed countries. So, what is it about culture that makes it such a violent place?
I'm sure it has to do with a combination of several phenomena but what are those key ingredients? I think the numbers in my first link illustrate that we haven't really done a very good job identifying our addressing what these key ingredients are that make us so violent. Obviously, there have been multitude of studies but perhaps it's time to erase the entire board and start over.
7 comments:
It's a combination of factors. For an advanced nation, we have a high poverty rate, and poverty breeds crime.
There's a lot of inequality, and inequality breeds envy, hatred and violence. And this doesn't manifest by poor people stealing from the rich -- it shows up with people of equal class stealing from each other when someone gets a little something extra.
We have easy access to guns, which increases the death rate. It's simply easier to kill with a gun for both physical and psychological reasons. That easy access to power may also give criminal the confidence to believe that their crimes will succeed. Guns are like a drug that warps people's minds, convincing them that violence is a solution to problems.
We do not value logic and reason. We deride it. We overvalue faith. We claim to admire people who "stand up for what they believe," even when we know they're wrong. We secretly love the strongmen who just take what they want (just listen to Republicans wax rhapsodic about the manly Putin), because we're envious and would do the same if only we could get away with it.
We have a high level of religiosity. I don't have any numbers, but it would be interesting to so see if there's a correlation between violence and religiosity. It seems that countries that are the most religious to have the most violence, especially when different religions intersect (Ireland, Iraq, India). Sometimes the violence is not in the streets in strongly religious countries, but it's used by the government to keep the populace under control (Saudi Arabia, Iran). All with the justification that it's god's will.
The least violent countries (Sweden, Japan) have the least religiosity, access to guns, and emphasis on individualism.
We are impatient as a culture, and don't respond well when we are told no, or to wait our turn, or when people tell us to do something for our own good, even when we know they're right -- that only makes us more angry.
We overvalue "entrepreneurs" and "go-getters." When people like this get all this adulation, they feel like they have a license to do whatever they want.
We overvalue individualism, which is tantamount to glorifying selfishness. A lot of the time this "individualism" isn't really that; it's a cover for taking stuff from other people while pretending you did it yourself. Like all these company owners who claim they did it themselves, when they are the grandsons of the guys who really did it themselves.
We have an entire subculture that spouts a self-serving philosophy that greed is good, that selfishness is the only acceptable way to behave, and that altruism is the worst possible evil. When people have no regard for others, it's extremely easy to commit violence to get your way, especially if you don't think you'll get caught (because for these people getting caught is the only disincentive for committing violence).
Mix all those together, and you're going to have a more violent society.
I think this answer at Quora is a pretty good summation:
http://www.quora.com/What-will-actually-address-Americas-firearm-homicide-problem/answer/Chris-Everett
We have some very violent, dysfunctional subcultures that tend to be concentrated in urban areas. A Venn diagram of turf wars between drug gangs would largely overlap. The rest of society compares fairly well with Europe. Orderly, settled, homogeneous societies are going to be less violent than mobile societies with large numbers of immigrants (internal or external) from various cultures.
It's best I not try to address Nikto's points right now. But I just don't think he has much, if any, personal experience with the sorts of people who generate these statistics. And, no, I I don't mean blacks, I mean criminals.
Our criminal justice system is fairly unique with the presumption of innocence and various provisions of the Bill of Rights. It is by intention meant to be more difficult to convict on the premise that it is better for ten guilty to go free than one innocent to be falsely imprisoned (and yet that still happens more that it should).
If you dig into the CDC WISKRS database you will find that some groups in the U.S. have a higher non-gun murder rate than other groups with-gun rate. Which pretty clearly shows that guns in and of themselves are not the problem.
That's a pretty good response, GD, and we are seeing some far right and far left groups move towards those ends. In fact, I think that's they key to getting some of the black vote moved over to the GOP. Show them how Republicans are going to get government out of their lives.
The only idea that struck me as unworkable was the "family values" section of his answer. How do you reduce the single parent households? Believe me, I'm no fan because those are invariably the students who are the worst behaved in class because the parent is too exhausted to actually parent.
I don't know Mark. It's not like we should force people to stay married.
However we could look at the incentive structure we offer to the poor and the working poor.
Finally, any policy that avoids the marginal-tax trap entirely by increasing disposable income the old-fashioned way — that is, by just letting low-income workers keep more of what they already earn — has a great deal to recommend it
the single mom is better off earning gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income and benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income & benefits of $57,045.
When the incentive structure makes a father with a lower paying job into a liability - we aren't encouraging two parent households - we are discouraging them.
Wow GD, it's almost exactly what Daniel Patrick Moynihan said would happen.
But why should actual results be used as a measure of good intentions, right?
Post a Comment