Ken and Corey take an in-depth look at America’s ongoing struggle with gun violence, using the four quadrants to track many of the most critical and commonly-blamed factors, conditions, and causes that seem to be contributing to this terribly wicked problem.
Written and produced by Corey deVos
Why does America have such a deadly problem with gun violence? What can possibly be done to solve the issue? Why do there seem to be no easy answers?
rom the foundation of the American union through the War of Independence, to its near dissolution during the Civil War, to the open frontiers of the Wild West and the digital frontiers of video games and first-person shooters — America has always had a deeply complicated relationship with the gun.
Firearms are woven into the very fabric of American life, society, and history, enshrined in our founding documents. Which makes the question of how to reduce gun violence in America an exceptionally difficult one to answer.
America’s pathological relationship with gun violence is what is often called a “wicked problem” — a deeply complex, multifaceted problem that cannot be fully seen or understood from any single point of view, and therefore requires an integral multidisciplinary approach in order to solve. Unfortunately, when it comes to gun violence, there are very few discussions out there that are even trying to put all the pieces together, choosing instead to politicize the brutal deaths of innocent children and families, and allowing the narrative to become dominated by these narrow biases, ideologies, and objectives. In the meantime, nearly 100 Americans die from gun violence every single day.
Because few people can fully see all facets of this incredibly complicated problem, our relationship with the gun — as a deadly weapon, as a defensive tool, and as a deeply-embedded cultural archetype — has become shrouded by shadow. On the one hand it is the ultimate equalizer of power, allowing the most vulnerable among us to defend their lives and land from those who would take them away. On the other hand they are machines designed for only one purpose, to kill other living creatures — and we are seeing far too many senseless killings in America today. For some they are a symbol of independence, individual freedom, and personal sovereignty. For others they are objects of obsession and even fetishization, a substitute gratification for our felt lack of inner power and control over our lives.
In this discussion, Ken and Corey try to identify the root causes of gun violence in America, and suggest some innovative solutions that might help us turn the page on this terribly wicked problem. Ken and Corey begin by identifying some basic facts in order to frame the discussion:
- America has a serious gun problem. In 2010, the U.S. homicide rate was 7 times higher than the average for populous developed countries in the OECD, and its firearm-related homicide rate was 25.2 times higher.
- However, gun violence in general has fallen sharply over the last 25 years, by anywhere from 49 to 74 percent depending on which numbers you are looking at.
- Suicide rates represent the majority of gun-related deaths. Suicides have risen by 25% in a 15 year period, and represent about 60% of all gun deaths.
- While mass shootings are the most terrifying form of gun violence, they also represent a tiny fraction of total gun deaths per year. In 2018 there were 38,658 gun-related deaths. About 23,000 were suicides. About 14,000 were homicides. Only 71 were victims of mass shootings, or 0.18% of all gun deaths.
- The majority of politically-motivated mass shootings since 2008 have come from the political right wing. Right-wing terrorism outnumbers Islamic terrorism by a 2:1 margin, and left-wing terrorism by a 5:1 margin.
Ken and Corey then discuss some of the most important factors, conditions, and commonly-blamed causes of America’s affliction with gun violence, using the Four Quadrants to help illuminate and unpack the true-but-partial roles that each of these factors play.
Because this is such a complex and Integal problem, and because people tend to only identify one or two of these as the “root cause” of violence — typically the political left looks at exterior right-hand causes and solutions to gun violence, while the political right emphasizes interior left-hand causes and solutions — this conversation is one of the most comprehensive takes on the issue that you will hear.
Click on each factor below for fuller descriptions and video discussions with Ken and Corey.
Finally, Ken and Corey explore some possible Integral solutions to gun violence — the simplest possible interventions that can have the greatest impact across multiple conflicting perspectives and political paradigms.
About Ken Wilber
Ken Wilber is a preeminent scholar of the Integral stage of human development. He is an internationally acknowledged leader, founder of Integral Institute, and co-founder of Integral Life. Ken is the originator of arguably the first truly comprehensive or integrative world philosophy, aptly named “Integral Theory”.
About Corey deVos
Corey W. deVos is Editor-in-Chief of Integral Life, as well as Managing Editor of KenWilber.com. He has worked for Integral Institute/Integal Life since Spring of 2003, and has been a student of integral theory and practice since 1996. Corey is also a professional woodworker, and many of his artworks can be found in his VisionLogix art gallery.
Well, this discussion is lightyears more integrally analytical than most that appear in other media. Kudos to Ken and Corey for being willing to take on the sacred shibboleths of the Boomeritis green left. Corey, in other media I’ve heard you own your left political orientation, an element I believe essential to any integral discussion, and you do a decent job keeping those in check.
As I’ve written about extensively in my AQALBlog, I believe the most critical meta-challenge is, as Ken has said elsewhere, the maturing of orange. All evolution pivots to and from orange, for only the self-actualized free individual can make the authentic choice to create and participate in enlightened community. The American founders were particularly sensitive to the inhibiting role of tyranny and coercion, and strove to promote not just political self-government but more importantly character self-government as the sine qua non of their bold experiment.
But as we can see in our struggles with own individual spiritual growth (addictions, shadow, self-violence, etc.), the earlier stages will not surrender to the higher orders easily. The “retribalization” that Ken so accurately observes is part of what I call the “amber counterrevolution,” in which Boomeritis green is a willing if unwitting participant. Amber and Boomeritis green are ganging up to strangle orange.
Are they succeeding? Let us keep this meta-narrative in mind as we examine how this titanic evolutionary struggle plays out in daily affairs.
Hello @BobandAnne, thank you for the discussion. But I can’t help but to feel like this comment is sort of missing the point. To me it sounds like you are saying, “this isn’t a problem, because there are other problems over there.” (But thank you for pointing out that health care is also a terribly wicked problem, as indicated by the statistics you shared. Another topic that is probably deserving of an 8-hour integral analysis as American society begins to transition to more universal solutions.)
The fact of the matter is, gun violence in America far eclipses gun violence in the vast majority of other modern nations. And it is a “wicked problem” in that there is no single factor or cause behind this violence. The word “wicked” here means “deeply complicated” more than it means “heinous”. That said, I think our gun violence rates can indeed be characterized as “heinous”, especially when comparing to other nations.
Gun violence is, in fact, a deep complicated problem, and one that absolutely requires an integral accounting in order to make any sense of whatsoever. Which is what we try to do in this very long and comprehensive discussion.
“it is Gangs that are a much larger problem when it comes to gun deaths and not Far Right Extremism.”
Yes, and we cover that. We also cover the fact that gun violence as a whole has been trending downward for the last several decades, despite a mild uptick in recent years. But this does not change the fact that, when it comes to domestic terrorism that results in fatalities, far-right extremism is the number one motivation. Because multiple things can be true at the same time.
“There are no White Supremacists in public, and in fact do you know any personally? How about you Corey?”
Yup, sure do. Extended family members. I mean, they probably wouldn’t call themselves “white supremacists” as some group identity they belong to, but they certainly believe that other races/cultures/people are inferior to their own, and often blame other people and cultures for whatever resentment or frustrations they feel in their own lives, whether it’s fellow American citizens or immigrants.
Not to mention the fact that we have had several self-described white supremacists run for political office in recent years. They have not been able to establish a legitimate political foothold, as Ken mentions, but that doesn’t mean they ain’t trying.
And as Ken points out, this type of thinking tends to come naturally to people who hold amber-level views. And that, unfortunately, describes most people. So yeah, some portion of white people at the amber stage probably have some degree of “white supremacy” somewhere in their system, whether conscious or unconscious. The thing is, as Ken and I point out, we used to have a lid on that sort of amber ethnocentrism — a lid called “modern universal values” — which is now being dismantled from both ends, and which makes people who hold racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. views that much more emboldened to express their views publicly.
But yes, you are right. Guns don’t kill people by themselves. People kill people. And when they do, they usually use guns. Because it’s super effective at getting the job done. I’m just not sure how much this distinction helps move the conversation forward. It certainly doesn’t make the problem any less “wicked”.
Thanks again for the conversation!
Interesting definition of “white supremacy”. In a broad brushstroke it covers from killers like Dylan Roof and people going around giving the Nazi salute… to people that are upset that they can’t speak their own language at the corner store anymore, their job was given to someone who doesn’t pay taxes and therefore can do it for 1/4th the wage and they are penalized for not having insurance while some politicians want to give FREE insurance to people from OTHER nations that come here illegally.
Until recently the latter would have been called being human, not ‘white supremacist’ but such are the times.
Ironically as I’m reading a book about Union soldiers in the Civil War I realize, that by the definition proposed above, these people that went and died on the side of freeing the slaves would most certainly be “white supremacists”.
But let’s step back for a second. For the sake of argument let play devil’s advocate say the above qualifies as a definition of “supremacy”.
This proposes an interesting conundrum: Black and Hispanic supremacy have experienced a far larger growth. It is currently promoted both in Congress and on TV. The current mindset says that being white is inherently flawed, while being anything BUT white is somehow ‘saintly’. White points of view are dismissed not based on logic, facts or arguments, but based on skin color of the messenger. White people are asked to leave campuses and not show up for certain events purely based on their skin color. Being proud of your ethnicity is encouraged for everyone, except white people.
Former TV CEO Says U.S. Should Ban ‘Straight White Males from Voting’
If you want to stop mass shootings in America, consider banning white men
Do white men really deserve to vote?
I mean, just pop open the TV on Msnbc and you’ll see the white people being guilty of everything under the sun. It’s almost hilarious. Did you know that even white robots are ‘racist’? Well, they are according to CNN.
As a member of a multi-racial family who immigrated (legally) to the US, I have to say that I have seen this “supremacy”, as defined above, from all races in forms at least as virulent. I have witnessed an Indian client being discriminated by Hispanic board when trying to create a Hispanic restaurant in their area (just because he’s not Hispanic himself). I’ve also personally seen black people discriminating against other black people based on shade of blackness skin color. Hispanic kids being beat up daily in a predominately black high school.
Recently, we’ve witnessed black people who are called “white supremacists” simply because they do not share certain points of view.
On the issue of guns I have a bit of a tainted view, I must admit, since my family comes from a socialist country where they were tortured.
The 2nd Amendment is there to allow defense from people, but also from government, by making somewhat untenable the idea of government unconstitutional control of people. It is there to provide a safety and counterbalance to a government becoming a tyrannical dictatorship. Venezuela’s gun control didn’t play out that well for them. The idea that you can trust the government without real balances in place is deeply naive from a historical perspective.
Socialism and collectivism SHOULD be demonized. And they are by 99% of anybody that has seen them 1st hand.
It’s rather ironic, because in a socialist state (not the one from books, the ones that play out in reality) you’d be taken out and they’d forcibly take out your earring and beat up a little. At least that’s what happened to my cousin who, being a metal head, was take out, his hair cut, his earrings pulled out, and I don’t mean pulled out as in taken out, but literally ripped from the ears (good thing his jewelry was cheap and it broke off before doing a lot of damage). He was then beat up with an iron bar over the soles of his feet and and hands. Just one example incident. Apparently metal music was deemed not good for the ‘collective’.
You don’t want to be in socialism or collectivism. It never plays out like in the books. Socialism is cancer.
Thank you and Ken for the talk.
So “white supremacy” = person who doesn’t like things like having to be penalized for insurance while government wants to provide same insurance free to illegals. Also, soldiers that fought in the civil war on against slavery. Got it.
So it’s not a stretch to say these guys got it spot on:
Even black people are white supremacists. Who knew.
Interesting. So using this logic, we can redefine Fascism or Nazims and have the bad Nazism and Fascism ala Hitler or Mussolini and the good one ala today’s Hitler youth, aka Antifa.
I mean… Top hit on Google:
I guess one could make the point that the Nazis killed literally millions of people… were it not for the pesky fact that Marxist Socialism killed hundreds of millions of people, some members of my family included.
This leads to rather embarrassing things such as “anti-fascists” applauding Hitler speech because ideas resonate so closely with them.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNMAp8kXWrc
All tragico-comedy aside, it’s amazing how the left has mind-wiped the population here of the horrors of socialism. This rebranding is as hillarious as saying that it’s not the old Nazism, it’s a “a new caring Nazism”.
Socialism is cancer. What you see in Venezuela is its full metastisized version. The argument then becomes how much cancer is good to have. I say none.
Let us lastly tackle the great unicorn: Ahhh, but all that socialism was wrong, it’s not ‘real’ socialism. Look at the nordic countries.
They can’t protect themselves. They can’t (don’t?) want to pay US for protection. They have not contributed anything that significant to the world.
I mean even medically they are inconsequential. Most of the great discoveries and breakthroughs were created in the US.
It is NOT an exaggeration to say that a good chunk of their population would literally be DEAD without the breakthroughs in the capitalist US. What would it matter that the health care was free IF you don’t have the discoveries made by a capitalist USA?
My family came from a socialist country with a ‘robust’ health care system. It was so “great” that everybody wanted to leave the country… and the secret police would beat you up if they caught you trying to leave.
At the end of the day I am a person that likes freedom.
I have nothing against ‘collectivism’. I know it from first hand experience - not book written by people with special interests. But far be it for me to tell someone how to live their life.
My main issue is that these systems do not allow you to opt-out. Just like the Obamacare, which made me lose my doctor and have insurance that only fresh-off the benches of med school (can’t tell humerus apart from humorous) “doctors” would take.
** I guess I should put in here that I don’t believe anyone should be left to die on the streets or be driven to financial ruin because of the “cost” of an illness… I also think that drug companies and lobbyists should be cut down as they drive up prices to unfair and ludicrous amounts. I just don’t think that “socialism” is the answer. Just like you don’t cut off your foot to deal with that pebble in your shoe that bothers you **
Anyway, I appreciate the civil tone.
God bless you and Ken.
Well, I agree with that statement 100%.
I just think you’re going about it totally wrong.
Do you think any kid suffering would have fared better under socialism? Millions of dead kids of the socialist health care system would suggest the answer is “no”… by far.
On a related note, the actual procedure of liver transplant was not pioneered in Finland, Sweden or any other nordic socialist country. It was pioneered in the US by a US doctor supported by US medicine.
We don’t have to solve a heart attack with cancer. It makes no sense.
Truth be told I don’t think I’m qualified to discuss holons or Ken’s theories. I’m still trying to wrap my head around them.
Socialism though is different. I’ve seen and experienced it first hand. It like I’ve been skiing for a good part of my life. My family has been skiing for almost all their life. To debate skiing with someone that has never hit the slopes and points to works by other people, who themselves never set foot on the slopes doesn’t seem productive.
Mind you, I’m not saying Maslow’s theory is wrong. Just that achieving it through socialism is.
A few lines later…
So it doesn’t work if we put Democratic Republic of North Korea, but IT DOES WORK if we say “democratic” socialism?
In the 1970’s and 80’s a certain area of NYC, “Greenwich village” to be precise gave rise to numerous bands from the post punk scene. These bands had a certain sound that could easily be identifiable. It was a pop punk type of sound. If you wanted to be part of that particular sound and music scene this was the place to be.
If you were a hard rock or metal band then you probably wanted to be in LA, on the strip, or maybe San Fran.
In the 1910’s a neighborhood in Vienna gave rise to a very specific current that would take over the world. It was based on Marx’s socialist theories. Some of the future leaders that frequented this neighborhood were Lenin, Trotsky, Freud, Tito and Hitler.
So my argument about Hitler being a socialist was not disingenuous in the least. Just because leftist academicians try to rewrite history doesn’t mean we have to swallow it whole. Why is it that today’s anti-fascist left resembles the Hitler youth so much?
On a rather ironic sidenote: most of these “academicians” and now waging war against spirituality and religion trying to erase and suppress both. * well unless it’s Islam, then we know there can be no wrong and everything is cool *
Let me leave you with this thought:
What kind of system designed for the “progress” of society does so at the barrel of a gun both figuratively or literally?
You don’t have to go far (to venezuela) to see the damage socialism has done. Here is an example closer to home and how ‘socialized’ things really work.
British court orders life support removed from 21-month-old Alfie Evans, who has rare brain disorder
Continue the discussion at community.integrallife.com
101 more replies