Another Day That Mass Violence Didn’t Break Out in the United States

Much of my career has been working with men in places with high rates of violence – favelas in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, low-income urban areas in Colombia, and in conflict zones from the Democratic Republic of Congo to Nigeria. It never seemed unusual that armed groups would hold huge sway over young men, seeking attention, identity, purpose, income, and that violence would break out and sometimes continue in such spaces. The violence in these various places was not surprising. It is tragic and devastating to communities and families but there is a logic to it. 

What has often caught my attention working in places of high violence – whether in conflict zones or low-income urban areas – is why there isn’t even more violence. In other words, I’ve always been amazed at the non-violence. In any of these settings, the vast majority of young men don’t join armed groups and the vast majority find ways to go about life. They find connections in school, in religious groups, in social networks and with their families. In short, the forces of non-violence – while they often cannot match the power of armies and poverty and weak government – are nonetheless strong.

While violence is often a contagion that pays forward as victims become perpetrators and weakened social institutions cannot keep the peace, non-violence is also contagious.

As of the last week in September, the United States saw its 324el mass shooting this year. This is outrageous, tragic, and makes us a global leader in mass shootings. But if we look at what drives such violence, it is perhaps more astounding that we have not had more and that the country has not erupted in general widespread violence.

The Administration has vowed revenge against what its perceives is some organized leftist plot against it. A prominent conservative online platform, the Daily Caller, has explicitly called for “blood in the streets." Nuestro national survey data finds more than 30 percent of men in the United States support the goals of militias, most of which would tear our democracy down, and 7 percent of men say they are members of such groups. Our data also finds that about a third of men and nearly as many women in the United States say they own firearms, and that nearly a third of men who own a firearm own AR-15s or other automatic weapons – the kinds used most often for mass killings. It’s downright irresponsible for a major platform of any kind to be calling for “blood in the streets” given how armed and ready we are. 

But here’s the main point: we have not erupted into mass violence. With so many young men facing the kinds of social isolation, owning guns, spending time in online spaces where anger and violence are propagated and facing childhoods of harm and risk, we have not erupted into the mass chaos and mass violence that so many would believe we are capable of.  

I hope these words won’t come back to haunt me. And every mass killing is tragic. But on most days, I am more surprised that the United States doesn’t break out into wider mass violence than I am surprised about another mass shooting.   

This should in no way leave us complacent or reduce our outrage at every such event. There is no consolation to be found in thinking well, it could be worse. But it may be help us think about what to do about our grave situation. Leaning into the things that unite us rather than just panicking about what divides us. What are those things?  

Schools that work – something all of us pay taxes for. The spaces where we meet – religious, social. Toning down the rhetoric online. Politicians who call for harm and don’t foment the hate. And much more.

Here’s the challenge: the far right wants this fear. They are often looking for reasons to go after “blood in the streets.” Violence is a contagion. Mass killings generate the next generation of mass killings. But peace, resistance, and non-violence are also contagious. Shame on those who would foment more violence. We need far more examples of politicians, parents, media voices, online platforms brave enough to stand up for peace – to acknowledge that as divided as we are, non-violence must and often carries the day. And it must define the future we choose together.