Posted at 2008-01-30 20:08:57.211. Permalink.
I downloaded and read the White Paper from the Ministry of Social Development. Being familiar, myself, with the literature on ASPD and psychopathy, I find this document to be consistent with current peer-reviewed research. The science, medicine and social research behind this program are solid.
I am also encouraged by the policies John Key has set forth for pre-adolescent and adolescent offenders. His proposals show that he looks at social problems systemically (or at least listens to those who do).
The only worry I have is this - will the actual, on-the-ground implementation of these programs remain true to their conceptual foundations, or will it be distorted and derailed by short-term political expediency, public hysteria, the desire for quick-fix solutions and the collective passion for vengeance? In other words, do the people at large have the patience to persist in systemic, long-term solutions to our social problems, which won't necessarily bring instant results?
The current criminal prosecution of Jimmy Mason for "child assault" does not give me cause for comfort in this regard. I know I've been harping on this case a lot, but I am deeply disturbed by it. Let's set the scene for a moment. Mason was seen flicking his youngest son on the ear. A schoolteacher and an off-duty police officer both saw this event. Did either of them walk up to him and offer help or assistance? Did either of them even attempt to ascertain what was actually going on before flying off the handle and summoning six (!!!!) constables to the scene? No - apparently they just flew into an hysterical over-reaction, over an incident which could have been handled with an offer of assistance and (if need be) a man-to-man talk with Mason.
And now, the police are laying criminal charges against this man. Why? Is it just to save face, so they don't have to publicly admit how silly they have been? Are they truly unable to see, that in following up a gross over-reaction at the scene, with a frivolous criminal prosecution, they are digging themselves deeper in the hole and making themselves look even more ridiculous rather than less so? Or have high-ranking police commanders in Christchurch truly lost their basic common-sense, and succumbed to mass hysteria? I honestly don't know, but no matter how you look at it, the implications of this are disturbing.
Now, my interpretation of the case is based upon the accounts I have read in the NZ Herald. If anyone knows of facts in this case, which I have either got wrong, or don't know about, please feel free to publicly correct me. I am well aware that the newspapers don't always get the story right the first time! If my characterization above proves to be substantially inaccurate, I will not be ashamed to say so.
Nonetheless, my point remains. It wasn't Helen Clark or Sue Bradford who summoned six constables to the scene, who then subsequently made a second Mount Everest out of an ant-heap. It was ordinary citizens - your neighbors and mine! Even worse, it appears that the Police are even less rational than the general public in this regard.
One American blogger has expressed his exasperation at his fellow countrymen in this way: "Americans are vulgar people. They respond to quick fixes, political slogans and violent solutions to dauntingly complex problems." Unfortunately, this seems to be true of Anglo-Saxon-Celtic peoples generally (of whom I, of course, am one). English-speaking peoples have long been known for a "muddling through" mentality, which refuses (or perhaps is truly unable?) to address problems systemically. In addition, we have long been known to periodically succumb to bouts of "Salem witch-hunt" hysteria (see Arthur Miller's great play "The Crucible").
The latter is due to the pernicious historical influence of Calvinist doctrine, which feeds self-righteous egotism while denigrating the need for conscious self-examination and personal moral struggle on the part of the self-identified "Elect of God." (Incidentally, I am thoroughly convinced that Calvin was an archetypal example of the sort of "schizoid ideologue" of whom I spoke in another thread).
This combination of egotistical self-righteousness and refusal to think systemically makes society ripe for the spellbinding, destructive influence of simplistic ideologies. Anyone who doubts this need only look at the political history of this country since the mid-1980's.
So, it is encouraging that political leaders are finally seeing the need to think about social pathologies systemically rather than ideologically. However, important as that is, it is not enough. The people at large (and, most especially, the Police, Courts and social agencies) have to be sufficiently willing to give up their tendencies toward egotism, psychological projection, blame-shifting, scapegoating and crude lust for vengeance for these policies to have any chance to work. The case of Jimmy Mason tells me that this society has a long way to go in this regard.
One last thing. It has been known for at least 150 years (since the time of French neurologist Dr. Jean-Martin Charcot) that mass hysteria is highly contagious. I will no doubt be met with the response that, although the Christchurch Police are undoubtedly over the top on this case, that "still, we have to send a message that child abuse is not acceptable." I will remind such prospective correspondents, in advance, that many people in America in the 1950's offered the same lame excuses for Joe McCarthy's behaviour on the grounds that "after all, we have to do something about Communist subversion, don't we?" So, before anyone hits the "Submit" button, please stop and think. Would you have considered such behaviour rational even as recently as nine months ago, let alone nine years ago? Your candid and unhypocritical answer will give you all the indication you need of how far we have fallen, and how low we have sunk.
