When Outrage Becomes Violence

Every so often, tragedy forces an uncomfortable question: When words serve not to inform, but to inflame, do the purveyors of that rhetoric bear culpability when someone acts on it violently? This isn’t just political theory—it’s a moral battleground we can no longer ignore.

---

The Tragedy in Minneapolis: A Horrific Case Study

On August 27, 2025, during morning Mass at the Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis, terror struck. Two children, ages 8 and 10, were killed, and 17 others—including 14 children and three seniors—were wounded when a shooter opened fire through stained-glass windows. The shooter, 23-year-old Robin Westman, died by suicide at the scene.

Westman had prepared disturbing videos and writings beforehand. The material included admiration for prior mass shooters, hate-filled slogans, and messages such as “Kill Donald Trump,” alongside antisemitic and anti-religious content. The FBI is investigating the attack as both an anti-Catholic hate crime and an act of domestic terrorism.

This tragedy—a faithful congregation at prayer targeted so violently—brings into stark relief how lethal rhetoric can hijack hearts and hands.

---

Weaponizing Rhetoric: Politics Meets Propaganda

In today’s hyper-polarized political landscape, it has become routine to frame opponents not just as rivals, but as monsters or existential threats. “They hate you. They want to erase your way of life. They are your enemy.” Such rhetoric doesn’t just polarize—it dehumanizes.

When combined with media that amplifies outrage—because outrage sells—we have a combustible mix. Anger sells ads, drives ratings, and garners clicks. The target becomes less a policy position and more a moral enemy. Citizens are radicalized from within their living rooms and on their bus rides.

So when unstable individuals consume this firehose of demonization, what’s to stop them from acting on it?

---

History’s Dark Lessons: From Propaganda to Genocide

This is not American exceptionalism—it’s human history. Past atrocities were preceded by propaganda campaigns that turned neighbors into targets:

• Nazi Germany: State-run media portrayed Jews as vermin, laying the groundwork for genocide.
• Rwanda (1994): Radio stations openly called for the extermination of the Tutsi.
• Stalin’s Soviet Union: Leaders were labeled “enemies of the people” and disappeared under state terror.

The pattern is always the same: Step 1—dehumanize. Step 2—demonize. Step 3—mobilize hatred into action.

---

Political Violence at Home: When Rhetoric Becomes Gunfire

The U.S. is not immune. In fact, we have already seen words turn into bullets in recent decades:

• 2017 Congressional Baseball Shooting (Alexandria, VA): A gunman opened fire on Republicans practicing for a charity baseball game, critically injuring Rep. Steve Scalise. The attacker had posted extensively about his hatred of Republicans.
• 2011 Tucson Shooting (Arizona): Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head at a constituent event; six were killed, 13 injured. The shooter’s instability, mixed with anti-government venom, created a deadly cocktail.
• 1994 White House Shooting (D.C.): A man opened fire intending to kill President Bill Clinton.
• 2022 Attempted Assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh: An armed man traveled to Kavanaugh’s home, motivated by anger at the Supreme Court’s abortion ruling.
• 2022 Cincinnati FBI Office Attack: Following the Mar-a-Lago search, a Trump supporter declared “war” on the FBI and attacked a field office.
• January 6, 2021: Politicians and media had a hand in the event—let’s leave it at that.

These incidents span both left-wing and right-wing rage, proving the point: when politicians and media treat opponents as existential threats, unstable individuals don’t see enemies across the aisle—they see targets.

---

Who Is Culpable?

Not politically expedient, but morally undeniable: yes, politicians who weaponize rhetoric share blame when someone acts on that hate-filled message—especially when the actor cites that rhetoric as justification.

And yes, media outlets that amplify outrage, share inflammatory soundbites, or build narratives around “the enemy” for profit—or “engagement”—are accessories before the fact.

In the Minneapolis case, Westman’s rambling, hate-laden videos and the slogans scrawled on firearms were not spontaneous. They were incubation chambers for violence. Once shared and consumed, those messages became accelerants.

---

A City Mourns, a Country Stares in the Mirror

Minneapolis is spiraling under grief. Vigils, resource centers, and political statements are pouring in. Officials are promising tangible support, while faith leaders try to heal the spiritual wounds.

And yet, as the city reels, the question lingers: We talk about culture and blame—but who holds the architects accountable?

---

The Escalation Spiral

Today’s outrage is tomorrow’s tragedy. Each inflammatory soundbite primes the next act of violence, and then the media covers the violence with the same sensationalism it helped create. It’s a feedback loop with no winners.

---

A Call to Action

After every mass shooting, Americans ask the same question: What can be done? While the answers are complex, here are three urgent steps we cannot ignore:

1. Individual Responsibility – Each of us must stop pouring fuel on the fire. That means resisting the urge to spread hateful memes, to demonize neighbors for voting differently, or to let rage define our political identity. If we want the cycle of violence to end, it begins with the words we choose.
2. Political Leadership – Politicians must rise above weaponized rhetoric. Leadership isn’t about rallying a base into fury; it’s about modeling civility even when it’s unpopular. If lawmakers cannot disagree without vilifying one another, they are not serving the republic—they are tearing it apart.
3. Media Accountability – Outlets that knowingly profit from biased, inflammatory reporting must be held to account. Ratings and clicks cannot excuse reckless narratives that enrage viewers into thinking political opponents are mortal enemies. Journalism should inform, not incite.

Final Note: After every tragedy, we wring our hands and ask what could have been done. Well, here’s one answer: we can all stop getting each other worked up into a frenzied state of anger. Words won’t heal every wound, but refusing to weaponize them is a good place to start.

_____________________________________

Dave Chamberlin served 38 years in the USAF and Air National Guard as an aircraft crew chief, where he retired as a CMSgt. He has held a wide variety of technical, instructor, consultant, and leadership positions in his more than 40 years of civilian and military aviation experience. Dave holds an FAA Airframe and Powerplant license from the FAA, as well as a Master’s degree in Aeronautical Science. He currently runs his own consulting and training company and has written for numerous trade publications.

His true passion is exploring and writing about issues facing the military, and in particular, aircraft maintenance personnel.

As the Voice of the Veteran Community, The Havok Journal seeks to publish a variety of perspectives on a number of sensitive subjects. Unless specifically noted otherwise, nothing we publish is an official point of view of The Havok Journal or any part of the U.S. government.