WFMU-FM is podcasting For The Record–You can subscribe to the podcast HERE.
You can subscribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE.
You can subscribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.
You can subscribe to the comments made on programs and posts–an excellent source of information in, and of, itself, HERE.
Mr. Emory’s entire life’s work is available on a 32GB flash drive, available for a contribution of $65.00 or more (to KFJC). Click Here to obtain Dave’s 40+ years’ work, complete through Fall of 2020 (through FTR #1156).
Please consider supporting THE WORK DAVE EMORY DOES.
FTR #1161 This program was recorded in one, 60-minute segment.
Introduction: Beginning with discussion of rising distrust of China, the program notes the role in that rising distrust of the coronavirus. First detected in China, the available evidence chronicled in numerous programs points to the Covid-19 pandemic as a biological warfare false flag operation and provocation–part of the Full Court Press against China.
The bulk of the program consists of Mr. Emory reading articles from The New York Times published over the course of the lockdown in the U.S. Highlighting the stress experienced by various population groups and the behavioral and physiological symptoms stemming from that stress, the articles–covering a period from the spring through fall of 2020–document the manifestations of the “bio-psy-op apocalypse.”
The articles chronicle: Stress on marital relationships; duress on sexual behavior, with New York and Los Angeles (among other cities) advising people to masturbate, rather than engage in sexual encounters with others; psychological dislocation of children, who can’t play with others; psychological dislocation of athletic youths, who can’t compete in sports; workers who can’t interact at the office with their peers; stress on friendships; people losing their hair in clumps, because of stress; people grinding their teeth and cracking them; the effect of people wearing masks and limiting the ability of others to respond to facial stimuli–an innate and important element of human psycho-social behavior; cities experiencing soaring murder rates because of stress; the effect of lockdowns on street demonstrations pursuant to the deaths of George Floyd and Breanna Taylor; rising rates of domestic violence; rising consumption of alcohol; rising incidence of people feeling suicidal; rising drug abuse; people foregoing wearing masks and practicing social distancing because of what psychologists call “Covid Fatigue;” people flocking to contrarians opposing various public safety measures; people expressing support for political leaders because of feelings of insecurity.
Mr. Emory also opines that the pandemic may well have interdicted the projected “Blue Wave,” because people who might otherwise have endorsed a more altruistic political agenda instead were feeling frightened and–as a result–more needy and selfish.
Although Belarussians had put up with Alexander Lukashenko prior to the coronavirus: “Trapped inside their country by the coronavirus pandemic, many Belarusians began to chafe at the inhumanity in Mr. Lukashenko’s rule and language that had once been easy to ignore. . . .”
We conclude with a look at the past, which may reflect on the future.
An academic paper produced by a Federal Reserve economist posits the socio-political effects of the 1918 flu pandemic as a factor contributing to the rise of Nazism in Germany.
Cited by numerous publications, including The New York Times, Bloomberg News and Politico, the study underscores some of our assertions concerning the fascist and extreme right-wing ramifications of the pandemic.
This timely and very important study will be referenced in future discussion of the psychological, sociological and socio-economic aspects of the Covid-19 outbreak.
Kristian Blickle’s analysis underscores points we have made about the demographic, economic and psychological devastation the pandemic is having on the body politic.
“A new academic paper produced by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York concludes that deaths caused by the 1918 influenza pandemic “profoundly shaped German society” in subsequent years and contributed to the strengthening of the Nazi Party.
“The paper, published this month and authored by New York Fed economist Kristian Blickle, examined municipal spending levels and voter extremism in Germany from the time of the initial influenza outbreak until 1933, and shows that ‘areas which experienced a greater relative population decline’ due to the pandemic spent ‘less, per capita, on their inhabitants in the following decade.’ . . .
“. . . . The paper’s findings are likely due to ‘changes in societal preferences’ following the 1918 outbreak, Blickle argues — suggesting the influenza pandemic’s disproportionate toll on young people may have ‘spurred resentment of foreigners among the survivors’ and driven voters to parties ‘whose platform matched such sentiments.’ The conclusions come amid fears that the current coronavirus pandemic will shake up international politics and spur extremism around the world, as officials and public health experts look to previous outbreaks for guidance on how to navigate the months and years to come. . . .”
1. Beginning with discussion of rising distrust of China, the program notes the role in that rising distrust of the coronavirus. First detected in China, the available evidence chronicled in numerous programs points to the Covid-19 pandemic as a biological warfare false flag operation and provocation–part of the Full Court Press against China.
Xi Jinping celebrates China’s battle against the coronavirus as a success. But in the United States and other wealthy democracies, the pandemic has driven negative views of China to new heights, a survey published on Tuesday showed.
The illness, deaths and disruption caused by the coronavirus in those countries have intensified already strong public distrust of China, where the virus emerged late last year, the results from the Pew Research Center’s survey indicated.
“Unfavorable opinion has soared over the past year,” said the survey on views of China taken this year in 14 countries including Japan, South Korea, Canada and Germany, Italy and other European nations. “Today, a majority in each of the surveyed countries has an unfavorable opinion of China.”
The results illustrate how much negative opinions of China have taken hold around the world in recent years. To China’s leaders, such wary attitudes could present obstacles for the Communist Party’s ambitions of expanding Beijing’s influence. The tide of public distrust could make cooperation harder even on issues where national interests align.
“Public opinion is a powerful constraint,” said Natasha Kassam, a former Australian diplomat who is a research fellow at the Lowy Institute in Sydney, where she studies public opinion and foreign policy. “We can see in both Australia and the United States, for example, souring public opinion has served as a powerful driver for governments to be particularly vocal” about China. . . .
2. The bulk of the program consists of Mr. Emory reading articles from The New York Times published over the course of the lockdown in the U.S. Highlighting the stress experienced by various population groups and the behavioral and physiological symptoms stemming from that stress, the articles–covering a period from the spring through fall of 2020–document the manifestations of the “bio-psy-op apocalypse.”
The articles chronicle: Stress on marital relationships; duress on sexual behavior, with New York and Los Angeles (among other cities) advising people to masturbate, rather than engage in sexual encounters with others; psychological dislocation of children, who can’t play with others; psychological dislocation of athletic youths, who can’t compete in sports; workers who can’t interact at the office with their peers; stress on friendships; people losing their hair in clumps, because of stress; people grinding their teeth and cracking them; cities experiencing soaring murder rates because of stress; the effect of lockdowns on street demonstrations pursuant to the deaths of George Floyd and Breanna Taylor; rising rates of domestic violence; rising consumption of alcohol; rising incidence of people feeling suicidal; rising drug abuse; people foregoing wearing masks and practicing social distancing because of what psychologists call “Covid Fatigue;” people flocking to contrarians opposing various public safety measures; people expressing support for political leaders because of feelings of insecurity.
3. Although Belarussians had put up with Alexander Lukashenko prior to the coronavirus: “Trapped inside their country by the coronavirus pandemic, many Belarusians began to chafe at the inhumanity in Mr. Lukashenko’s rule and language that had once been easy to ignore. . . .”
. . . . But to a large middle class and a worldly elite in the former Soviet republic of 9.5 million people, the system was one they could live with: For those who stayed out of politics, the good roads, clean streets, prim lawns, tax breaks for tech companies and ease of travel to the West could make for a good living by Eastern Europe standards.
It took just months this year for that balance to collapse. Trapped inside their country by the coronavirus pandemic, many Belarusians began to chafe at the inhumanity in Mr. Lukashenko’s rule and language that had once been easy to ignore. . . .
4. In our ongoing series about the Covid-19 outbreak and its multi-dimensional manifestations, we have termed it a “bio-psy-op.” An academic paper produced by a Federal Reserve economist posits the socio-political effects of the 1918 flu pandemic as a factor contributing to the rise of Nazism in Germany.
Cited by numerous publications, including The New York Times, Bloomberg News and Politico, the study underscores some of our assertions concerning the fascist and extreme right-wing ramifications of the pandemic.
This timely and very important study will be referenced in future discussion of the psychological, sociological and socio-economic aspects of the Covid-19 outbreak.
Kristian Blickle’s analysis underscores points we have made about the demographic, economic and psychological devastation the pandemic is having on the body politic.
“A new academic paper produced by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York concludes that deaths caused by the 1918 influenza pandemic “profoundly shaped German society” in subsequent years and contributed to the strengthening of the Nazi Party.
“The paper, published this month and authored by New York Fed economist Kristian Blickle, examined municipal spending levels and voter extremism in Germany from the time of the initial influenza outbreak until 1933, and shows that ‘areas which experienced a greater relative population decline’ due to the pandemic spent ‘less, per capita, on their inhabitants in the following decade.’ . . .
“. . . . The paper’s findings are likely due to ‘changes in societal preferences’ following the 1918 outbreak, Blickle argues — suggesting the influenza pandemic’s disproportionate toll on young people may have ‘spurred resentment of foreigners among the survivors’ and driven voters to parties ‘whose platform matched such sentiments.’ The conclusions come amid fears that the current coronavirus pandemic will shake up international politics and spur extremism around the world, as officials and public health experts look to previous outbreaks for guidance on how to navigate the months and years to come. . . .”
“Fed Study Ties 1918 Flu Pandemic to Nazi Party Gains” by Quint Forgey; Politico; 5/05/2020.
A new academic paper produced by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York concludes that deaths caused by the 1918 influenza pandemic “profoundly shaped German society” in subsequent years and contributed to the strengthening of the Nazi Party.
The paper, published this month and authored by New York Fed economist Kristian Blickle, examined municipal spending levels and voter extremism in Germany from the time of the initial influenza outbreak until 1933, and shows that “areas which experienced a greater relative population decline” due to the pandemic spent “less, per capita, on their inhabitants in the following decade.”
The paper also shows that “influenza deaths of 1918 are correlated with an increase in the share of votes won by right-wing extremists, such as the National Socialist Workers Party” in Germany’s 1932 and 1933 elections.
Together, the lower spending and flu-related deaths “had a strong effect on the share of votes won by extremists, specifically the extremist national socialist party” — the Nazis — the paper posits. “This result is stronger for right-wing extremists, and largely non-existent for left-wing extremists.”
Despite becoming popularly known as the Spanish flu, the influenza pandemic likely originated in the United States at a Kansas military base, eventually infecting about one-third of the global population and killing at least 50 million people worldwide, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Germany experienced roughly 287,000 influenza deaths between 1918 and 1920, Blickle writes.
The paper’s findings are likely due to “changes in societal preferences” following the 1918 outbreak, Blickle argues — suggesting the influenza pandemic’s disproportionate toll on young people may have “spurred resentment of foreigners among the survivors” and driven voters to parties “whose platform matched such sentiments.”
The conclusions come amid fears that the current coronavirus pandemic will shake up international politics and spur extremism around the world, as officials and public health experts look to previous outbreaks for guidance on how to navigate the months and years to come.
Looking Back from 1984
The CEOs of Moderna and Pfizer both came out yesterday with the announcement that a third booster shot of the companies’ mRNA coronavirus vaccines may be needed for people who already had two shots as soon as September. It was the kind of report that’s a grim reminder that we still don’t yet have a sense of how aggressive the ‘new normal’ COVID vaccination regime will be going forward. Are people going to be expected to take two, three, or more coronavirus vaccine shots for the rest of their lives? Is this a permanent feature of the modern world?
Along those lines, here’s a recent article in STAT News looking at the how the COVID pandemic might end. Or not end. It’s a good news/bad news kind of story. The bad news is that a growing number of experts are concluding that there’s no way of avoiding a SARS-CoV‑2 endemic. It’s just going to be here forever. The will never be any herd immunity that extinguishes the virus from the populace.
The good news is that experts are also increasingly suspecting that we’re going to see a similar scenario play out with SARS-CoV‑2 that is suspected to have taken place with previous novel coronavirus outbreaks: the virus and human immune systems will evolve to an immunological detente, leaving rendering SARS-CoV‑2 into little more than a common cold. Recall how, for example, the OC43 common cold coronavirus is suspected of jump from cows to humans in the late 19th century, causing waves of deaths at first before taking its place as one of humanity’s contemporary common colds. And evidence suggests exposure to these common cold coronaviruses can confer at least partial immunity against SARS-CoV‑2. It’s not quite herd immunity, but pretty good.
That said, the additional bad news is that we don’t actually know for sure if that’s what actually happened with past coronaviruses and there’s no guarantee SARS-CoV‑2 will behave the same way, leaving a high degree of ambiguity about what’s the appropriate course of action. Some experts are predicting that, if the virus follows the pattern of novel flu viruses, we could see SARS-CoV‑2 achieve common cold-like status in a matter of a couple years. It’s the elderly, in particular, who could benefit the most from their prior exposure to the virus or vaccine. Others are far more cautious and continue to recommend not just continuing to focus vaccinations but also maintain all the other tools at our disposal for minimizing the spread of the virus (i.e. masking, and social distancing policies).
In other words, one of the big unanswered questions when this pandemic first hit was whether or not this is the kind of virus that people just need to get exposed to — and survive — just once before their immune systems have enough exposure to deal with repeated exposures. If that’s the case, we could be on the path towards SARS-CoV‑2 becoming a common-cold...but only after everyone alive has either been exposed to the virus or the vaccine. But if the first exposure to SARS-CoV‑2 isn’t enough to prepare immune systems, in particular elderly immune systems, to repeated exposures then we might not be looking at a SARS-CoV-2-to-common-cold scenario. And that all remains an open question.
So it sounds like we could be heading into a period where the virus could be effectively normalizing itself, but we won’t really know right away, leaving a high degree of uncertainty about the appropriate policies and levels of caution to maintain going forward. It’s possible the virus could behave very differently from past coronaviruses and turn into something nastier. But it’s also possible we could end up maintain effective lockdown policies for a virus that is in the process of quelling itself. And that’s the kind of ambiguity that’s going to make for some tricky policy-making going forward, whether we’re looking at a good new or bad news scenario:
“If the pattern holds, and it is expected to, SARS‑2 will at some point join a handful of human coronaviruses that cause colds, mainly in the winter, when conditions favor their transmission.”
If the historic pattern holds, we should expect SARS-CoV‑2 to stick with us forever as a common cold virus. But we unfortunately have so little actual experience with these kinds of events that we don’t really know what to expect and can’t even say for certain what happened with the last coronavirus jump to humans. We know experts suspect OC43 started off like SARS-CoV‑2 before rapidly turning into a common cold. But we don’t know for sure. It’s just an educated guess:
And then there’s the words of caution from scientists at the NIH or WHO, with the head of the WHO’s Health Emergencies Program predicting that we’re not even close to the end of this and that “the other tools that have been shown to stop transmission” (social distancing and masking) should be maintained:
So while we can’t predict how the virus will evolve, that lack of confidence allows us to confidently predict that the debate over the proper policy responses are going to be exceptionally contentious. Now, on the one hand, the evidence of whether or not further lockdowns are necessary will be readily apparent. It’s a matter of how packed the hospital emergency rooms are getting with COVID patients. If there’s no surge in COVID patients, future lockdowns will be presumably be deemed no longer necessary. And if hospitals are filling up again, new lockowns will be obvious sensible measures. But there are plenty of messier scenarios, like maybe one or two more years of deadly SARS-CoV‑2 variants before the virus and humanity’s immune systems arrive at a truce. According to one school of thought, exposure to SARS-CoV‑2 is the key to training our immune systems and getting this virus under control. Under another school, exposure is the key to extending the pandemic and giving rise to new variants. It’s a pretty big divide that’s probably going to get bigger the more things open up. Or, depending on how things play out, the more they don’t open up.
This next June 5, 2021 ABC News article by Josh Margolin, Aaron Katersky, Pierre Thomas and Sony Salzman discusses how President Biden reported that violent crime has “spiked since the start of the pandemic over a year ago,” An internal Department of Homeland Security from spring of 2020 warned that the emotional, mental and financial strain exacerbated by the new coronavirus pandemic combined with social isolation — especially if prolonged — may “increase the vulnerability of some citizens to mobilize to violence.”
“The outbreak of Covid-19, and government’s response to it, have intensified concerns that could accelerate mobilization to violence with extended periods of social distancing,” the memo reads, noting such isolation is a “known risk factor” in inciting violent extremism, along with “financial stress and work disruptions, including unexpected unemployment and layoffs” also “increasing.”
“COVID has been a tipping point,”
Isolating factors like these can increase the risk of engaging — or attempting to engage — in violent extremism, according to the DHS memo.
The memo warned, underscoring the research-backed “need to build social links and bridges to prevent social isolation, which in turn, reduces the risk of radicalization to violence.”
Social distancing has been key to stopping the virus’ spread — but after more than a year of being fearful of anyone near potentially being infected, experts point out that self-preservation may have amplified feelings of mistrust in our communities.
“Someone who’s coming towards you on the sidewalk, and you’d think, you’re spraying your droplets at me!” Butts said. “People were afraid. More so than before, we had to see other people as a potential deadly threat.”
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/feds-warned-spring-spike-violence-extremism-pandemic-memo/story?id=78408266
Feds warned last spring of spike in violence and extremism during pandemic: Memo
ABC News
Gun violence and extremism are on the rise.
July 5, 2021, 11:30 AM
Nearly one out of 10 of the Capitol rioters arrested so far are veterans, so what is the mil...
Xinhua via Getty Images, FILE
While COVID-19’s surge has ebbed, violence is on the rise across the United States.
There has been a rash of gun violence in what President Joe Biden called an “epidemic,” including several public mass shootings, increases in incidents in major metropolitan areas and an uptick in road rage clashes.
While dramatic declines in levels of coronavirus have engendered new hope and optimism for some, the effects of the pandemic and the measures taken to combat it linger, simmering tensions brought to a boil and manifesting themselves in anger, and in some cases, violence, experts say.
Federal authorities saw that swell in violence spurred on by COVID’s hardships coming — before the pandemic even got into full swing.
An internal Department of Homeland Security memo obtained by ABC News from spring of 2020 warned that the emotional, mental and financial strain exacerbated by the new coronavirus pandemic combined with social isolation — especially if prolonged — may “increase the vulnerability of some citizens to mobilize to violence.”
“The outbreak of Covid-19, and government’s response to it, have intensified concerns that could accelerate mobilization to violence with extended periods of social distancing,” the memo reads, noting such isolation is a “known risk factor” in inciting violent extremism, along with “financial stress and work disruptions, including unexpected unemployment and layoffs” also “increasing.”
Even as the nation and globe was locking down, the memo, which has not been previously reported, urged agency partners to develop an “action plan” for when communities begin to return to “normal” activities, predicting “the increase in mass gatherings, combined with the lengthy social isolation and other life stressors,” may create environs churned up by COVID, and ripe for violent upheaval.
When reached by ABC News regarding these early warnings, DHS declined to comment.
As a tentative reopening got underway in May, DHS Secretary Mayorkas established the Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships, and a domestic terrorism branch in the Department’s Office of Intelligence & Analysis, aimed at shoring up the Department’s “whole-of-society approach” to thwarting extremism and other targeted violent acts in the U.S.
Attorney General Merrick Garland announced a “renewed commitment” and multi-pronged Justice Department effort to reduce violent crime through community engagement, targeted enforcement, and interagency collaboration.
Violent crime has “spiked since the start of the pandemic over a year ago,” President Biden said in late June, announcing a range of actions and federal support towards targeting gun violence.
“And as we emerge from this pandemic with the country opening back up again, the traditional summer spike may even be more pronounced than it usually would be,” Biden said.
Pandemic a ‘tipping point’
It wasn’t just federal officials sounding the alarm last year. Doctors — including psychologists — say the pressure of the pandemic may be exacerbating acts of violence and aggression.
“COVID has been a tipping point,” Dr. Aimee Harris-Newon a clinical psychologist in Chicago who focuses on wellness and preventive care. “On top of too much chronic stress, the impact of all this trauma… now everything is starting to leak out.”
And some experts say psychological stressors were already mounting prior to the pandemic.
“We were already in a weakened condition when the pandemic hit — class divisions, overt racism, partisanship, a really poor social support infrastructure — so if you think about the effect of the pandemic on an ‘epidemic’ of shootings — it’s like the immune system of the United States was already suppressed,” Jeffrey Butts, director of the research and evaluation center at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, told ABC News.
“The social, psychological and economic distress in our country has surpassed people’s ability to cope, and there hasn’t been enough support,” added Dr. Marni Chanoff, a psychiatrist and founder of the integrative wellness group at McLean Hospital. “There is no road map on how to navigate this time.”
‘COVID turned up the volume’
When Mohammed Abdelmagied heard loud bangs near his Times Square kebab and hot dog stand the last Sunday in June, he thought it was firecrackers — someone celebrating an early Fourth of July, or maybe freedom from COVID-19.
It wasn’t: it was gunfire: something he never expected in the area where he’s worked for 13 years — a heavily policed place where shootings have been relatively rare.
“I turn my face to the square, I heard everything but I didn’t see nothing,” Abdelmagied, 46, told ABC News.
Two shootings in two months at the Crossroads of the World have brought a flood of police to the area, in a city that until recently had become a model of safety in major metropolitan areas. These flares of gunfire aren’t only in New York, nor have they remained only within city limits across the country.
Major U.S. cities have been rocked by spates of gun violence over the past few months, part of an already rising trend which did not stop during lockdown, but has become more visible as the country reopens.
“Shortly after a resumption of ‘normal’ life,” the memo from spring of 2020 says, tensions already brewing, then exacerbated during the pandemic, may provide an opportune moment for violent extremism, and violent attacks.
Not including suicides, more than 19,400 people died by gun violence in 2020, up from roughly 15,440 in 2019, and far past the rates in years prior, according to Gun Violence Archive, a nonprofit research group
In 2021, there have already been more than 10,000 gun violence deaths — with nearly six months left to go.
“COVID turned up the volume,” and has fomented a disintegration of social connections and norms, Butts said.
“Then we see some of these horrible shootings — the actual magnitude of the increase is undeniable,” Butts added.
It’s not just gun violence on the rise: acts of aggression on airplanes have also hit new highs — and not only more flight disruptions, but more violent ones as well.
The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating a record number of potential violations of federal law in unruly passenger cases — identifying more than 490 cases this year so far where passengers potentially broke the law by “interfering with the duties of a crew member.” That’s more than double the amount of cases investigated in 2020; and more than two and a half times the amount in 2019.
Airlines have now reported more than 3,200 reports of disruptive passengers to the FAA this year; the vast majority — more than 2,400 — involve people who refused to wear a mask.
In a Homeland Security Threat Assessment released in October 2020, authorities also underscored concerns arising from COVID-19’s impact, where “anti-government and anti-authority violent extremists could be motivated to conduct attacks in response to perceived infringement of liberties and government overreach as all levels of government seek to limit the spread of the coronavirus that has caused a worldwide pandemic.”
Isolation effect
While social media helped maintain personal connections during quarantine, it can also be quite alienating, experts say — and present an opportunity for online radicalization.
In addition, pandemic job loss can be both heavy financial and psychological burdens.
And the unprecedented loss of life and loved ones to the virus, with more than 600,000 deaths in the U.S. alone, has taken an unspeakable toll, experts say.
Isolating factors like these can increase the risk of engaging — or attempting to engage — in violent extremism, according to the DHS memo.
“These risks are likely to become more widespread as public health measures are expanded– or the timeframe for maintaining social distancing increases,” the memo warned, underscoring the research-backed “need to build social links and bridges to prevent social isolation, which in turn, reduces the risk of radicalization to violence.”
Social distancing has been key to stopping the virus’ spread — but after more than a year of being fearful of anyone near potentially being infected, experts point out that self-preservation may have amplified feelings of mistrust in our communities.
“Someone who’s coming towards you on the sidewalk, and you’d think, you’re spraying your droplets at me!” Butts said. “People were afraid. More so than before, we had to see other people as a potential deadly threat.”
Americans are also still reeling from the economic and emotional blow dealt by COVID-19, despite the ebb of infection, and signs of improvement in the labor market, according to Pew polling this spring; those most vulnerable to the virus have also borne the brunt of its financial fallout.
Breaking the cycle
Tensions boiling over across the U.S. have fed what’s becoming a vicious cycle difficult to break; experts worry, that residual anxiety and collective trauma may outlast the pandemic itself.
“That kind of mental and emotional wear and tear doesn’t go away,” Butts continued. “All the harm that results will be festering for some time. That’s a huge concern.”
As some Americans’ anger about the state of the nation abates from where it was during the summer 2020 COVID surge — experts urge vigilance about what that receding rage might leave in its wake.
Even as the nation prepared to celebrate the Fourth of July and some measure of freedom from COVID, federal authorities raised concerns about the possibility of domestic terror and violence, including mass shootings, as the 2021 summer season gets into full swing.
Whatever the new normal might be, Chanoff notes getting there will take time.
“The human spirit is resilient and the human capacity to heal is enormous,” Chanoff said. “But without support, I think that these things will likely continue to rise.”
ABC News’ Josh Margolin, Aaron Katersky, Pierre Thomas and Sony Salzman contributed to this report.