The Master Narrative of Democracy-Destroying Right-Wing Gun Culture (Part 3)

This is the next edition in my repository post on what I am calling The Master Narrative of Democracy Destroying Right-Wing Gun Culture, the dominant paradigm in the interdisciplinary academic field of gun studies (and as a key organizing idea in the wider culture).

This narrative complements The Standard Model of Explaining the Irrationality of Defensive Gun Ownership. Maybe someday I will be able to merge these two components of the dominant approach to understanding guns in the United States into one Grand Theory.

First, read a bit about scientific paradigms generally and then get to the growing list specific works after the Thomas Kuhn book cover.

Hey, buddy, can you paradigm?

Generally, a paradigm can be understood as a school of scholarship in which members are in fundamental agreement about key theoretical presuppositions, concepts, empirical procedures, and exemplary studies. The concept of scientific paradigms was developed by philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn in his landmark 1970 book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

In fact, the level of consensus that Kuhn finds in scientific fields such as physics does not usually exist in sociology. In Kuhn’s terms, most social sciences are actually “pre-paradigmatic.” This makes the level of consensus in the interdisciplinary field of gun studies remarkable.

Following are examples of works that fit the Master Narrative. I will continually update this list as new examples are published.

Paradigmatic Exemplars of The Master Narrative

Harel Shapira’s book, Basic Pistol: Living and Dying by the Gun in America, is forthcoming, but he previews the argument in a New York Times opinion essay (“Firearms Taught Me, and America, a Very Dangerous Lesson”) from May 2023. I wrote extensively about his ideas here back then, discussed it on “Light Over Heat,” and cover some of that same ground in the chapter on firearms training in my forthcoming book.

In the essay that previews his book, Shapira writes: “The classes I attended trained students to believe that their lives are in constant danger. They prepared us to shoot without hesitation and avoid legal consequences. They instilled the kind of fear that has a corrosive effect on all interactions — and beyond that, on the fabric of our democracy.”

He concludes that a “less recognized casualty” of defensive firearms training “is the kind of public interactions that make democracy viable. The N.R.A. says that ‘an armed society is a polite society.’ But learning to carry a gun isn’t teaching Americans to have good manners. It’s training them to be suspicious and atomized, learning to protect themselves, no matter how great the risk to others. It’s training them to not be citizens.”

In summary, defensive gun training — which is at the heart of Gun Culture 2.0 — undermines democracy.

Firepower: How the NRA Turned Gun Owners into a Political Force by political scientist Matthew Lacombe is one of my Top 5 books on guns in America (as of August 2022). Lacombe correctly argues that much of the legislative strength of the National Rifle Association is due to its ability to politically mobilize guns owners on its behalf. And key to that political “weaponization” has been the cultivation of “gun owner” as a social identity in the first place.

Unlike many who tell a simplistic tale of the NRA, Lacombe rightly observes that the NRA was both highly political and highly ideological prior to the Cincinnati Revolt in 1977. In fact, in the Virtual Book Club I am running right now on Gun Country (another piece of The Master Narrative), Andrew McKevitt highlights activist journalist Carl Bakal’s claim in his book The Right to Bear Arms that “the NRA has for nearly four decades conducted one of the most intensive and imaginative lobbying operations witnessed in Washington” (p. 8). Written in 1966. The post-1977 difference is that the NRA became partisan and Lacombe explains how today’s NRA political alignment with the GOP grew.

This work contributes to The Master Narrative mostly in the final conclusion Lacombe draws from his meticulous and clever empirical analysis. In the final paragraph of the book he writes that the NRA “represents something of a democratic paradox: it subverts the will of the majority, but does so by working the levers of democracy” (pp. 236-7). Furthermore, “the NRA’s identity-based appeals tend to rely on fear in a way that encourages polarization, discourages compromise, and–in some cases–advances conspiratorial views that are misleading and offensive” (p. 237). The final sentence of the book that secures its standing in The Master Narrative reads: “In the end, then, the NRA demonstrates that groups can be effective at using democracy to their advantage, even to the point of undermining it” (p. 237).

My first example is actually not by a scholar, but the book so purely reflects The Master Narrative that it provides a great starting point: Gunfight: My Battle Against the Industry that Radicalized America by Ryan Busse. (I have previously reviewed the book here.) Busse is the former Vice President of Sales for the gun manufacturer Kimber. He is mad and he doesn’t deny it. He also wants to atone for his sins and this book is part of that process.

Busse argues that the National Rifle Association and its economic arm, the gun industry, have played a “leading role” in politically radicalizing America (p. 57). He concludes, “The gun industry and the NRA have successfully transformed an entire country” (p. 303).


NOTE: Links to purchase books through Bookshop.org are affiliate links. Bookshop.org sales help support independent bookstore and any affiliate commissions I earn go to supporting the costs of running this and my other websites.

6 comments

  1. The last defensive driving class I attended (voluntarily, for an insurance discount) included many stats emphasizing the dangers of automobiles and the consequences for failing to drive defensively.

    In the last Combat Lifesaver Course I took, the 18D medic teaching it basically stated you’re a fool for failing to have at least a basic med kit with tourniquet and nasopharyngeal airway on your person at all times, even off duty. He recommended always having an ankle kit when out of uniform.

    I would be interested in Harel Shapira’s take on that and wonder if he would also conclude defensive driving and medic courses are “training them to not be citizens.”

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Shapira is revealing his own characterological issues when he acknowedges which lesson was most salient in what HE learned from defensive handgun training. Defining today’s gun owners as the major impretus for most societal conflict is simply obfuscation.

    Like

  3. […] Yamane: This is an opinion. Metzl could have cited another New York Times opinion by sociologist Harel Shapira that I have commented on extensively (and addressed also in my book). Whether it will be empirically established in the book remains to be seen. It does fit well with what I call The Master Narrative of Democracy-Destroying Right-Wing Gun Culture. […]

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.