Aaron Worthing performed a fisking of former LA cop Christopher Dorner's strange, self-serving manifesto, yesterday. A lot of conservative bloggers and pundits have had some fun turning the tables on all the left-leaning talking heads that Dorner praised in his diatribe, many of whom had either participated in blaming Limbaugh/the TEA Party/Palin/right-wing rhetoric for a variety of shootings performed by lunatics who had no credible affiliations with any of those parties. Jesse Jackson, Jr., fresh off of inking a plea bargain for embezzling campaign funds for his personal use, issued a statement expressing an understanding of the alleged murderous nutjob's hurt feelings.
Just as disturbing as Dorner's murder-justifying manifesto are the reactions of his sympathizers. I'm not going to say that there isn't systemic corruption in the LAPD, but I will say that I don't see how it could possibly exonerate Chris Dorner from having executed the daughter of a man against whom he holds a grudge and her fiance. Even the Cosa Nostra frowns on whacking daughters of enemies. But here's what one moral idiot posted in comments to an LA Times article outlining some of Dorner's many complaints against fellow officers:
LAT Top Commenter Joseph Tolman, one would like to believe, is an isolated idiot supporter of the homicidal griefer, but the number of thumbs up for Mr. Tolman and the gist of the vast majority of comments to the article suggest that that would be wishful thinking. It seems that there are many people who think that this sociopath is completely justified in liquidating whoever he wants to as a result of the indignities he feels he has suffered, as long as his victims can be somehow viewed as having some connection with the folks that Dorner blames for his troubles. Whether those connections constitute complicity is a matter that his sympathizers feel they are uniquely qualified to judge, pretty much the same way that these same people will have pinned other atrocities on their ideological opponents, on the basis of torturous pathways of causality. Much of the MSM shares these delusions of grandeur.
In his screed, as Worthing points out, Dorner repeatedly defends his motives by expressing his belief that many bad characteristics of other people are "not in his DNA," while all the good ones are. We see this trick in the more ridiculous versions of feminism, and in every racialism. By contrast, Ms. Quan's DNA must necessarily have been tainted by her father's, which justifies her killing. The long and the short of it is that Dorner must not be held responsible for his rampage, because he has been genetically pre-programmed to act, out of the purest motives, as a punisher of the ills of society, particularly as they express themselves in the LAPD. On the other hand, Ms. Quan, whose father Dorner blames for having provided him ineffective representation in the disciplinary hearings that led to his dismissal from the LAPD, is guilty of having exercised her choice to be the daughter of a PD corruptocrat, in Dorner's eyes.
I could make a case that Dorner is a Frankenstein's Monster patched together from the charnel-house materials of grievance ideology and animated by critical race theory, but even those pernicious doctrines aren't guilty of Dorner's atrocities. Only Dorner is, at least insofar as American society still believes in individual agency. If it no longer does, and goodness knows that there are segments of it that don't, or that believe that only some people, who are racially or otherwised privileged, are responsible for their actions—then it really is every man for himself. In that case, buy more guns and ammo.
I recall when the appeal to DNA was fundamentally racist. I believe that the label the academics liked to wield against it was 'essentialism.' Well, that was then, this is now.