Exploring the Hypothetical Impact of an Annual 'Purge'
Written on
Chapter 1: The Gladiator Contest Proposal
Not long ago, while catching up with some friends from my hometown, an unsettling conversation arose. One friend proposed, to general agreement, that reviving gladiatorial matches could be an effective method to manage violent offenders. The idea was that such spectacles could entertain the masses while simultaneously reducing the number of dangerous criminals. A win-win scenario, as they saw it.
However, I resisted expressing my horror at this suggestion, instead voicing concerns about the potential consequences of normalizing violence for entertainment. I warned that if society became desensitized to violence, it might start with those who commit heinous crimes, but soon escalate to targeting less severe offenders. What happens when someone's financial troubles lead them into the arena? Could a missed mortgage payment result in a fight to the death?
I pointed out that the appeal of this idea stemmed from the assumption that none of us would ever find ourselves in such a position. I’d prefer not to support a movement that could lead to such grim outcomes.
They seemed puzzled.
This conversation resurfaced when I stumbled upon the 2013 film The Purge while browsing Peacock. Set in 2022, the movie depicts a dystopian America where crime is nearly eradicated and unemployment stands at an astonishing 1 percent. The premise? For one night each year, all crime—including murder—is legal.
Initially, I had avoided The Purge upon its release; its grim outlook clashed with the optimistic atmosphere of the Obama administration. I assumed it was merely another example of the horror genre's extreme violence, akin to Hostel or the Saw series.
But in 2024, reflecting on the divisive era under Trump, I felt it was worth a second viewing. Did the filmmakers grasp something about American culture that I had overlooked? Was there a deeper commentary on the psychology and politics surrounding violence?
The answer, as it turned out, was not particularly enlightening. In fact, I suspect that writer/director James DeMonaco might not have truly believed in his own storyline.
What if the Purge Was Real? - YouTube
This video delves into the societal implications of a hypothetical Purge scenario, examining its potential effectiveness and unforeseen consequences.
Section 1.1: The Fallacy of Controlled Violence
The central argument of The Purge is that humans harbor a finite amount of violent impulses. If allowed to release this aggression once a year, they would remain peaceful throughout the rest of the year. However, this notion contradicts established psychological findings. According to researchers Joshua Reynolds and Sean McCrea, most homicides are spontaneous rather than premeditated. For instance, in a study by Wolfgang and Ferracuti (1969), only a mere 5 percent of homicides were classified as premeditated.
Further studies indicate that among juvenile offenders, most killings arise from impulsive behavior. Even in a significant sample of prisoners, only 23 percent of robbers reported having planned their crimes.
The film portrays a scenario where individuals meticulously plot their Purge night, but this misrepresentation conflates impulsive and calculated violence. The reality is that premeditated murders are rare because, when given time to think, most people choose not to act on violent impulses. In moments of passion, however, individuals often disregard the consequences.
Thus, a designated Purge night would likely encourage violence that social norms and legal penalties usually deter. It would fail to address the ongoing violence that goes unchecked every day.
Section 1.2: The Misguided Premise of Violence Containment
The movie assumes a constant rate of violence, suggesting that containing it to one night is a viable solution. However, various factors influence a society's level of violence. Research has shown a strong correlation between poverty, income inequality, and rising homicide rates in the U.S. A comprehensive study covering the years 1990 to 2020 revealed that states with severe poverty and income gaps experienced the most significant increases in homicide rates, particularly during the upheaval of 2020.
It’s crucial to note that it’s not poverty itself that breeds violence, but the interaction between poverty and inequality. Additionally, communities plagued by poverty often lack effective policing, and studies have demonstrated that a consistent police presence serves as a far more effective deterrent to violent crime than the threat of harsher punishment.
In some cases, government actions can inadvertently foster violence. For instance, Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, which allows individuals to use force without the obligation to retreat, did not lead to the intended reduction in homicides. Instead, it made homicide prosecutions less likely when the perpetrator could convincingly assert that they felt threatened.
Source: Economist.com
Despite the intentions behind "Stand Your Ground," it essentially incentivizes violence by diminishing the repercussions of escalated conflicts. This illustrates that violence in society is not constant; rather, it fluctuates based on policy decisions.
Chapter 2: The Illusion of Job Creation
What if the Purge Actually Happened? - YouTube
This video explores the economic implications of a real-life Purge, questioning the viability of job creation through violent means.
The film suggests that the annual Purge would lead to a labor market with ample job opportunities, claiming unemployment would drop to 1 percent. However, this notion is fundamentally flawed. The idea that eliminating excess workers can eradicate unemployment has been disproven repeatedly.
Take immigration, for example: while some argue that immigrants take jobs from native workers, the reality is that immigration often stimulates economic growth and creates more jobs overall.
France's attempt to implement a 35-hour workweek aimed at improving work-life balance, yet it was based on the incorrect assumption that reducing hours for some would generate jobs for others. Just as there isn’t a fixed amount of violence, there isn’t a set number of jobs to be filled.
The filmmaker’s static perspective on violence and employment undermines a more nuanced understanding of culture and markets, which are dynamic and ever-evolving.
The critical question remains: would an annual Purge genuinely allow individuals to purge their violent tendencies, or would it foster a cycle of grudges and vengeance? If businesses faced the certainty of rampant vandalism annually, how would that influence their investment and inventory practices?
In essence, an annual Purge would likely escalate both violence and unemployment throughout the year.
The Real Message of The Purge
Rather than simply serving as a pressure-release valve for violence, a more accurate metaphor would be a complex control panel with numerous levers and knobs. Finding the right balance is challenging, as it requires adjusting variables that influence other behaviors.
This perspective often clashes with the moralistic view of violence, where humans are seen as inherently flawed beings prone to violence based on free will. The prevailing belief is that, given our flawed nature, it’s best to channel our violent impulses through controlled societal mechanisms.
However, as one watches The Purge, it becomes apparent that DeMonaco may not truly endorse this idea. While there’s a strong negative correlation between education levels and violent crime, the film portrays educated, affluent individuals as the most depraved characters, exploiting the Purge to target vulnerable populations.
In a non-Purge world, such individuals would likely avoid circumstances that lead to violence, as they have too much to lose by succumbing to their darker instincts.
Ultimately, it appears that DeMonaco's intention is to reflect a certain segment of American society, suggesting that even those who live in comfort and privilege can descend into violence under the right conditions.
Though his critique of societal hypocrisy is valid, he undermines his message by framing the Purge as an effective means of controlling violence. The truth is, as discussed, it would not serve that purpose.
If one looks closely, a deeper truth emerges: the Purge is already a reality in disadvantaged communities where neglect and desperation lead to unchecked violence. This systemic violence is perpetuated not by individuals but by social structures that fail to support the marginalized, often leaving them to suffer in silence.
The affluent may choose to ignore this reality, content to observe from a distance, as long as it doesn’t encroach upon their comfortable lives.
The most effective strategy for reducing violence is to extend the protections and opportunities associated with middle-class life to as many individuals as possible. Unfortunately, addressing this issue through a documentary may not be as entertaining as a fictional horror film.