Warning: Boring post.
Now that
the last embers have stopped glowing, and the last wisp of smoke has dissipated
in the winter air, it’s perhaps time to take a look at the phenomenon of the Hunt
for Christopher Dorner from the viewpoint of psychology.
In the course of this article I shall make
the following assumptions, for convenience only, and not because I necessarily believe in their factuality:
First, that Mr Dorner is dead, and that – any claims to the contrary –
the corpse found in the charred cabin was his. In fact, for the purposes of
this article, Mr Dorner’s continued existence or otherwise is irrelevant.
Second, that the people who were alleged to have been killed by Mr Dorner
were actually killed by Mr Dorner. Since this article is, basically, about the
public psychological reaction to Mr Dorner’s alleged murder spree, and not
about the murders per se, the question of his actual guilt is, again,
irrelevant.
I would also like to disclose a couple of
facts:
First, that I only heard of Mr Dorner at a very late stage of
proceedings, and then it was the word “drone” which caught my attention (more
on that in a moment) and
Second, that I am not particularly interested in the doings of an unhinged
American ex-policeman going on a small-scale rampage in the US. I am, however,
very interested in peoples’ psychological reactions, especially as moulded and
manipulated by the media. After all, it is media moulding that “manufactures
consent” for illegal imperialistic wars against inoffensive nations.
Third, that I will not, in the course of this article, rehash the events of either Mr Dorner's rampage or the hunt for him. I shall merely study the implications.
Right.
There is a book I read once upon a time, by
the name of The Running Man, and
written by Stephen King under the name of Richard Bachmann. Now, I’ve not exactly hidden my opinion about Mr
King’s writing, and this book isn’t anything to make me change that opinion.
But the basic idea was superb.
In a none too distant dystopic US, a game
show involves sending fugitives out into the world with a few hours’ head
start, and then sends out SWAT-style “hunters” to track him down and eliminate
him. For every hour the fugitive can survive, he earns a bonus; if he kills a
policeman, he earns another bonus; and if he can survive for thirty days, the
jackpot of a billion dollars is his.
Thirty days doesn’t sound so tough, does
it? Well, the record is eight.
The book’s premise is relatively simple.
Televised game shows are the modern gladiatorial contest, with people hooked on
to manhunts as entertainment so as to get their mind off their daily miseries.
The book’s protagonist is also given a video recorder and a set of “tapes” (the
novel was written in the early 1980s) to make a daily record to send to the
show’s organisers. If the record wasn’t sent, the fugitive would lose the right
to the money but be hunted indefinitely.
Of course, the whole thing was a set-up.
The location from which the tapes were sent was revealed to the hunters, so
they knew just where to go. The common people, on the other hand, stood to make
a fortune as a reward if they turned in information on the fugitive, but if
they harboured him or helped him in any way, they stood to be added to the
target list. Obviously, the dice were loaded against the fugitive, and the show’s
producers made every effort to make him look like an evil monster in order to
turn society against him.
In the course of being on the run, King’s
Running Man – who began as a man who had to take part in the show to recover
his finances, get his sick daughter treated and stop his wife from having to prostitute
herself – discovered that the agency which produced the show, and the
government of which it was a part, kept the population starved and unhealthy in
order to maintain control. When he mentioned this on his tapes, his voice was
dubbed over and replaced by obscenities before broadcast. The chase required a
hateful antagonist, not a simpatico
hero.
This isn’t a review of the book, but as I
came across Mr Dorner’s story, my mind immediately went back to it. An object
of hate, on the run, with the hunt for him playing itself out on television,
with all modern technological aids available involved? What more could a
network want?
Well, it had a lot to work with – death, for instance: the deaths of Mr
Dorner’s alleged victims, followed by his own, all as part of entertainment on
a grand scale. The killing of an innocent young couple and an equally innocent
policeman, who happened to be conveniently as black as Dorner himself, this
freeing the networks of the taint of racism; it was a gift. And, just as the fugitive Running Man became a kind of
underground hero to a lot of people, a surprising number became enamoured of
Chris Dorner as a hero and resistance figure.
There was Dorner’s “manifesto”; a long,
repetitive plaint about his treatment at the hands of the racist and corrupt
Los Angeles Police Department which apparently exists online in several
versions, one of which I read – without any great pleasure, may I add. Some of
these versions apparently included (if the descriptions I have read of them
online are anything to go by) fairly bizarre endorsements of various politicians
and celebrities, including Hillary Clinton and George H W Bush, which – if true
– makes his idolisation by “radicals” fairly surreal. But according to a lot of
people, again, these versions of the “manifesto” were manipulated by persons
unknown to make Dorner look silly. If so, we have another direct tie-in to the
book.
Now, I have no opinion on the factuality of
Dorner’s complaint against the LAPD. I take it for granted that the LAPD, like
every other police force I know of, anywhere on the planet, is corrupt and
incompetent – and it certainly proved its incompetence when it shot up various
innocent citizens, thereby giving Dorner a credibility he may not have
expected. But, as far as Dorner’s own complaints against the LAPD go – about
the process which began with him lodging a protest against a fellow officer and
ended with getting him sacked – I have no opinion. And it does not matter.
Self-defence measure |
It does not matter because, in this case, Dorner himself obviously believed what he
was saying, or acted exactly as he would have if he had himself believed what
he was saying. The fact that the
LAPD belatedly declared that they would “revisit” the question of his sacking
is neither here nor there – even if Dorner was fairly sacked, it didn’t change
his motivation, or his actions.
Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but Americans
have in recent days been exercised over the question of drones being used in the
Homeland and against Americans. As far as I’m concerned my position is clear –
if Americans don’t like drones used against them, they should have protested
when said drones were being used against non-Americans, and I’m not going to
shed a single tear over them getting a taste of their own medicine. But, of
course, if you are going to use drones, it becomes much easier if you can sort
of ease into it by chasing...a notorious killer of innocent people, a big black
hate object?
I think it does.
The entire Dorner saga, in any case, was a
direct lift from popular entertainment. Not just entertainment from the public
point of view, but clearly from Dorner’s as well – because there can be
absolutely no doubt that he got the idea for his revenge against the police
from the movie Rambo. A sane person,
of course, wouldn’t take an action movie as a template for real life; but then
a sane society is not hooked up to death and manhunts as entertainment.
I’m far from pointing to the US as unique
in this respect, though the saturation of America with electronic entertainment
makes it the leader. Media these days have long abandoned the slightest attempt
at analysis or objectivity. Since “grabbing
eyeballs” is all that matters, there’s absolutely no doubt that there will be
more of these televised “manhunts” as the days go on. I read somewhere that
there could well be producers angling for the right to telecast executions. I
would not be surprised.
Incidentally, The Running Man was made into an awful film starring Arnold
Schwarzenegger, which had absolutely nothing to do with the book except that it
shared the names of one and a half characters. There was one interesting thing
about the film though – the protagonist was a policeman who had been unfairly
sacked (and imprisoned) for protesting police brutality – just as Dorner
claimed to have been.
Another thing about Dorner’s rampage was
that it was obviously a suicide campaign; Dorner’s original “manifesto” made
that clear enough. But of course he
had to die, and in a spectacular fashion; everything demanded it. The media had
to have a glorious last stand and a suitably dramatic death, for ratings. The
police – for revenge and to shut Dorner up before he could talk of corruption
in the department. The authorities, because nobody can be seen to take up arms against the power structure and survive, for obvious reasons; and Dorner himself, because going out in a blaze of glory
(and it happened in a literal blaze) was the only ending that made any sense to
his situation.
They all got what they wanted.
At this point, again, the facts of the case
don’t matter – the perceptions do. Obviously, Dorner’s personal saga came to a swift
end, and his threats against his alleged tormentors remained entirely
unfulfilled. The story of Dorner has ended. But there are other Dorners, and
the media is still there, waiting.
The story of death as entertainment is only
just beginning.
Terrible things happen. When they happen in America to American people, we linger on every detail, to the point where it is violence porn. Those (white) (mostly) kids at Sandy Hook, CT, got shot up and we got days and days of it, unnecessary days. (Disturbingly there were discussions about whether this was the worst shooting, thereby tempting someone to create a worse shooting.) During this time, I believe there were several drone strikes that killed non-American children in Afghanistan/Pakistan and not a bit of attention was paid. I guess the -stan kids weren't cute enough. On to Dorner.
ReplyDeleteThe time that was spent viewing the burning cabin was NOT spent discussing the issues of the upcoming SOTU address or Obama's position on drone attacks. Or anything beyond what Michelle Obama might wear.
The whole Dorner affair - the coverage of it - was carefully choreographed pornography to distract us from the carnage taking place now far away, and the carnage that might take place, soon, not so far away.
There'll be more.
https://twimg0-a.akamaihd.net/profile_images/2591662759/aa-bread-and-circuses-romans1.jpeg
ReplyDeleteYou connected the dots on this one brilliantly, Bill. I'd the same thoughts, myself, as the whole story was unfolding.
ReplyDeletePanem et circenses, indeed.
Good bad or indifferent - King's book is proving to be prescient....
First of all, I am glad I'm not the only one who does not think much of the odious writing of Stephen King. I am consistently stunned by how many otherwise intelligent readers believe he is a writer. (STILL better than the shockingly bad John Grisham, however...)
ReplyDeleteI am also happy that you were able to enunciate that, for the purposes of your analysis, it doesn't matter whether this guy's complaints had merit. It is exactly the treatment of worthless nuts that determines how seriously a society values the rights of its citizens.
All that being said, I wish that one of these manifestos - just one! - could be written just a little more coherently. So you have committed a crime, captured the country's attention for a day or two - take advantage of that by getting a coherent rant out to the masses!
Ah well.