Does a violent culture create the Culture of violence? 
Or Vice-Versa?

Topic came up among a small showing at our last (men-only) book group dinner.  And I've been giving it some (more) thought since.  The Colorado massacre will surely have this age-old debate steaming up again and it will likely follow the same old course it has since the first stories were told and songs were sung around the fire in every tribal community and gave birth to the most universal of cultural traditions.  Don't want to write an essay here, so thought I'd go in search of some short and pithy quote (yet not glib) that I thought might somehow cut through the  clutter and provide a jumping off point for the few things on my mind.

“The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience, Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, Politics without principles”  
--Mahatma Gandhi 

He may have been less saint than the official history would have us believe, but I think he hit this one out of the park. And the whole exceeds the sum of it's parts only because each of the parts constitutes a whole unto itself...

Stetsasonic was an American hip hop group formed in 1981 in Brooklyn, New York.
They are remembered as one of the first hip hop crews to use a live band,
and their positive, uplifting lyrics have made the group
forerunners of alternative hip hop and jazz rap. 

And though the question I posed at the top here could spark a lively debate with legitimate points scored on both ends, it seems pretty obvious to me that all "Culture" grows out of the "realities on the ground".  Hip Hop music grew out of the realities on the streets of inner city ghettos.  Those who live in relative peace and harmony by virtue of their ability to pay for the protective armor of an insulated community may look upon the culture of violence in horror and wish to distance themselves from its corrosive effects upon their children and families...but whatever restrictions they desire to impose on access to reflections of that culture won't have any effect on the culture itself.  

Tipper Gore and her (unelected) gang of censorious mother hens who tried to push for legislation to control the distribution of music that they found morally reprehensible only led to providing new ways for marketers to further maximize their profit potential by making children that much more desirous to get what was now deemed "Dangerous".  Nothing like a big DO NOT ENTER sign to insure that kids will find a way to enter even faster and sooner. 

My favorite part of that whole Gore against gore fiasco was when the senate subcommittee had Frank Zappa  testify and when asked if he thought that songs about violent acts and behavior had negative effects on the listeners, Zappa replied in words to the effect that 95% of all popular music is (and traditionally been) love songs--and apparently that hasn't seemed to have had any positive effect. 

He also said:

"I think you should leave it up to the parent, because not all parents want to keep their children totally ignorant."

And George Orwell famously said...

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

And I'll give the last word to Bob Dylan:

"Democracy don't rule the world, You'd better get that in your head; This world is ruled by violence, But I guess that's better left unsaid."