So long as any community conceives of itself, by way of culture, enforcement, education, religion, entertainment and history, as the chosen community, as a body august and messianic, that community can only present itself as my enemy.
Not adversary. Enemy.
An enmity unto death.
Roman Catholic Church, the allegedly holy Nation of Eretz Yisroel, Southern Baptist Convention, Restored Russian Rodina, glorious Marxist Party of Ubiquitous Liberation, the various churches universal and triumphant, the Reformed Industrial Welfare State, the People's Republic of China or whatever jihadist group du jour has a monopoly on the mediated fears of the corporate entertainment complex...
...all enemies.
Not contestants. Not competitors.
Enemies.
And anyone who adheres to one of these salvationist regimes, I must treat in the same way.
And before some do-gooder shit bum wanders in to throw props for pacifism, forgiveness and free love my way - fuck you and the high fucking horse you tricked into giving you a ride down the path of holy self regard.
Like Hazlitt, I'll take my pleasure in hating as much as I take it in loving those friends and kin with whom I break bread and keep faith.
Hatred has its virtues, not the least of which looks a whole lot like self-preservation in the face of salvationist assclowns, traditional power gluttons and the new New Model Army of volunteerist self-flagellation.
I get one life. No one else will ever die my death.
And anyone - eh nee won - who has even as a fragment of a wisp of a shred of a portion of his doctrine or creed - that others must sacrifice this life for the greater glory of another life to come (material or immaterial, inevitable or dependent on human will), that mother fucker puts himself squarely in opposition to me and mine.
If you cannot die my death, you do not get to live my life...
*
...And I'll extend the same courtesy to you.
Crow's Eye: Maintaining a commitment to Pointless Acrimony™ and Hate Filled Invective™! Also available in corvid mischief and traditional sly dog's mistrust.
8 comments:
When I was invited to join a human rights speakers bureau at a time my friends and I were battling militias and other vigilantes, often the only other people who bothered to show up were Quakers and nuns. Other than the occasional comment by them that I was divinely inspired, they made pretty good company.
One of those paradoxes of life in America.
When the present conflict has finished its course, rest assured that they will turn to making the rest of us behave, these salvationists - either those in the other camp, or those in our own.
It's a hard thing for people to get, this premise:
If you cannot die my death, you do not get to live my life...
It's so simple.
And yet so confounding for so many.
"If you cannot die my death, you do not get to live my life...
*
...And I'll extend the same courtesy to you."
But not to a pacifist who is willing to play fair and let you (or anyone else) cling to the virtues of hatred?
By the way that wasn't a dig at you, JC, nor was it a dig at the virtues of hatred, nor was it me riding in on any high horse with any shred of holy anything.
Nor was I throwing "props" your way. I just saw pacifists on your shit list and if this pacifist has the courtesy to step aside to let others live their own lives, why should I allow them to deny me my life?
What works for one person (hatred, in this case) may be the very thing that drives another person of a different genetic make-up to suicide (literally).
Or in other words, "If you cannot die my death, you do not get to live my life..."
Andromeda,
I have no problem with pacifism. I have a problem with "do-gooder shit bums" who use pacifism, forgiveness and the like as props on their stage of self-righteousness.
Without fail, they step aside when power comes a knocking, too busy polishing their gleaming armor of self regard to actually resist those who would rule.
Pacifism, for do-gooder types, sure seems like an excuse to take the pose of righteousness, without having to assume any of the costs of resistance.
I prefer non-violence, as a rule. And while there are those who espouse pacifism, I do not, though I have no truck against it.
I will do serious damage to any person I catch trying to hurt my kids. That's not bravado or braggadocio. That's just how I feel, and I know my weaknesses and limitations well enough to know that there are a number of situations where "turning the cheek" just doesn't sit right with me.
If someone honestly believes that they only way he or she can be truly moral is to practice non-violence, more cred to that person.
For the record, I agree with Gandhi. Non-violence isn't pacifism. It isn't quietism in the face of human evil.
It's direct and deliberate resistance, a conscious and bodily challenge to the existing order, and to those who would enforce it. Nothing pacifistic about that.
I guess it bears repeating - it's do-gooders come to instruct people in self-sacrifice who earn my ire, not honest folk who'd rather a plowshare in hand, than a sword.
Thanks for the thought-provoking response, JC. :-)
Yes, I'd rather a plowshare in hand than a sword, but self-righteousness is not my intent, nor do I intend to instruct in self-sacrifice. Ideally no one should have to sacrifice anything (of lasting import)---and certainly not themselves---to achieve self-actualization.
I believe the highest purpose of pacifism is a very outspoken, courageous one where you challenge the oppressive establishment's idea that violence (brutality and murder) must be a part of any system of power or government.
Delicious resistance! I will never get enough of that taste until the current systems fall away.
Pacifism also means non-violence as morality---but that is a standard to which I hold myself, and not a lofty perch from which I claim the so-called "right" to judge another person's behavior or system of morality. It comes down to this: when I die, I want to leave peace as my legacy. I have no need or desire for my "name to be known" and repeated after I'm gone; rather, it's my perception that everyone who lives leaves a "footprint" behind when they die---not only on the earth but also on human consciousness (via the network of surviving family, friends, co-workers, countrymen, enemies, etc). I want to leave peace behind as an active demonstration to others of what non-violence can achieve.
Each person is entitled to walk their own path, and anyone on the path of truth is on a path parallel to mine; therefore we will not "cross paths," meaning we will not find a point of conflict. I have nothing but respect for the pursuit of truth, justice, freedom and equality, in any form.
Wanting to "do serious damage" to any person you catch trying to hurt your kids---as you would say, "I have no truck against it." That's not bravado or braggadocio, that's fighting to protect those you love, and the innocent.
You hit the nail on the head as I've come to expect. The Dudley Do-Right's of the world piss me off too. I wish there was way we could rope them all into a spaceship and launch it far, far away from here.
Post a Comment