El Paso: The Real Root Causes of Mass Shootings

Monday, August 5, 2019
By Paul Martin

By Selwyn Duke
August 5, 2019

In the El Paso shooting’s wake, evident is the same wash-rinse-repeat pattern. There are the inevitable calls for gun control by demagogues concerned only about people control, those who put the onus on whites when most mass shooters are non-white, and propagandists who blame the “Right” when most violence originates with the “Left.” It’s quite tiresome, really. In truth, the main underlying cause of increased mass-murder events — and so much evil in general — is a severe philosophical/spiritual malaise besetting our nation.

Were gun control the remedy here, mass shootings would be rare. Not only were there fewer firearm laws many decades ago, but in 1940s and ‘50s New York City, boys would often take guns on the subway because they had rifle clubs at school. So is access to firearms really the problem’s root cause?

As for the El Paso shooter’s motivation — our immigrationism combined with left-wing environmental concerns — there are people who will do evil in a cause’s name regardless of its nobility or ignobility. The real question here is, boiled down: Why are we seeing so much more evil in America now than in bygone days?

Many people find it ironic that the El Paso shooter’s father is a mental-health therapist. I find it unsurprising. I used to work with children, and “social scientists” often had horribly behaved kids (in fact, a psychologist’s young son was involved in the theft of $300 at the business where I worked).

These anecdotes absolutely relate to a much wider phenomenon. Psychologists have done much to shape modern parenting habits — and thinking in general — in today’s society, and, of course, they tend to epitomize what they peddle.

“Psychology” is a Greek word meaning “study of the soul,” ironic since today the field is soulless. While once part of philosophy, psychology was divorced from it in the 19th century in an effort to make it a science. This was a grave mistake.

Science confines its study to the material world, to what can be observed and measured within it. This means that, from a scientific standpoint, man can only be a physical being, an organic robot comprising chemicals and water.

In this vein and very much to the point, morality — properly understood as something transcending man — cannot exist, by science’s lights. Can you see a principle in a Petri dish or a moral under a microscope?

This idea was reflected in a man I know of who once said, “Murder’s not wrong; it’s just that society says it is.” How can the wholly scientific — that is to say, the wholly atheistic — argue with him?

The Rest…HERE

Comments are closed.

Join the revolution in 2018. Revolution Radio is 100% volunteer ran. Any contributions are greatly appreciated. God bless!

Follow us on Twitter