magnet for violence

“we do not attract what we want, we attract what we are”

We all knew that one boy (almost exclusively male) in high school who was a magnet for mayhem. Or maybe a magnet for violence. “Things” just happened when they were around. Often you struggled to point out the one thing that could associate them with the violence or the mayhem excepting that in some form or fashion, they were involved. These were the boys the mothers kind of cringed every time they heard their own son was going to be doing something with them (mothers have a radar for magnets of violence/mayhem). Society is strewn with magnets for violence. In fact I would argue as they get older, more mature, and are successful as magnets for violence, these are the people who embrace watching the world burn simply “because some men aren’t looking for anything logical, like money. They can’t be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn. (Alfred in Batman).”

Anyway. There are two aspects of the magnet:

• Attracting violence

Shit just happens around these people and they don’t avoid the shit. Sometimes they seek out environments, sometimes the environments seem to seek them out and sometimes (rarely) life offers moments unsought. It doesn’t matter. Trailing this person is always a trail strewn with mayhem and violence. I would say that leading this person is usually words. What I mean by that is even the dumbest violent magnet uses rhetoric that opens doors in people’s minds for the possibilities of doing or condoning violence. I call this a bad version of ‘productive vagueness.’ Business is strewn with productive vagueness, a lack of specificity in what is desired from a behavior standpoint which permits some autonomy as well as some plausible deniability. Anyway. It’s like a magnet of violence is more a door opener than an actual violent person (although they are not opposed to doing some violence). Trump is a magnet for violence and exhibits all the characteristics of a high school magnet who has matured into an adult magnet.

• Attracting violent people

Bullies, authoritarians, power hungry narcissists, are just dangerous individuals with little larger power. The problem is they are magnets for violent people. Magnets rarely do the violence or even smart enough to do violence that avoids the legal system; they empower people who can do it. I have always pushed back on “power corrupts” because power cannot corrupt everyone – it is contextual to the individual. Paraphrasing Ursula Le Guin: ““It is very hard for violence to take hold of the unconsenting soul.” Maybe that is what I mean by magnet here. A magnet for consenting souls. This argument is similar to one that has followed Trump around like a bad rash. Deplorables was probably the first smart iteration. The full comment was not that everyone who was going to vote for Trump was deplorable, but rather all the deplorables would vote for Trump. Not all people who are part of MAGA are violent, but if you are a violent soul you will inevitably be part of the MAGA crowd.

There is also a subset of this ‘attracting violent people.’ And that is violence fighting violence. The “left” is absurdly non-violent in nature so there will inevitably be groups who will defend the non-violent – antifa comes to mind. I highly recommend Talia Lavin’s book “culture warlords”, but as she points out, antifa is not an organization, it is a responsive group. They are quasi-violent’ people who come together, ad hoc, in response to violent “right” groups. They are, well, anti-fascist and while not all MAGA is fascist, if you are a fascist (or unwittingly adopt some authoritarian fascists-like attitudes), you will inevitably be part of MAGA.

Regardless. A magnet for violence will attract violent people (and their ideas) like moths to a flame.

Trump is a magnet for violence. Even his idea of “unity” is violent. To suggest anyone creates violence more than he in the US political arena is absurd. Absent of Trump, America would still be divided/fragmented, the political rhetoric would still be horribly corrosive, but the country would be structurally less violent. Ponder.