March 27, 2006

What the Fuck Is Wrong With People?

I've had a great storyline stuck in my head for the last couple of months. It's a thriller of sorts but rooted in today's chaotic times. One of the things central to the plot is killing certain figures to protect a nation. In getting my head around the concept of assassination or ideological killings I considered the following:

1. George Bush advocated assassinating Saddam Hussein prior to the invasion of Iraq in secret talks with Britain.
2. Cracker mutherfuckers sent death threats to the Dixie Chicks.
3. Matthew Shepherd's killers used the "gay rage" defense.
4. Ariel Sharon might have been assassinated for advancing more moderate approaches to an Israeli-Palestinian peace.
5. Afghani clerics want to give the death penalty to a man who converted to Christianity.
6. "V for Vendetta."

I think violence can be fun and entertaining but ultimately it debases a civilized society. I like fictional works and entertaining subjects more than I like the stuffy atmosphere of academia and "civilized" society. Mark my words, I will never belong to that bullshit uppercrust sticking one's pinkie in the air at high tea club. Not my bag. Seriously.

But I don't like bullies either. In fact, there's nothing that will piss me off more than a bully. Maybe that's one of the reasons I hate Dubya so much. At heart he's a fucking bully. A pussified sonofabitch who pokes fun at people for sport or utterly destroys their lives becasue he can. I'm just still unsure of his motivation. Or anyone else's on that list. Well, maybe V's but in a very academic sense because of the book and the very fact that it is the only example given which is fictional. I might feel very differently if it were a True Hollywood Story on E!.

I can't understand the emotion that leads to what all I have described above. Is it fear? Is it rage? Is it momma bear/bear cub protectionism? Or is it a combination of all three?

Any time one resorts to violence, there is an underlying threat of harm to one's self. You never get to just pop the other guy and walk away without a scratch. That shit's in the movies. When you hit someone in the face, your hand will hurt. You may bruise it, you may breaks bones. It's gonna hurt you whether he gets a shot in or not. And unless you've hit someone before, you won't expect it. Just like you don't expect guns to be quite as loud as they are up close. Up close, they sound like a cannon and you will smell the burnt gunpowder. It will burn your nose. A block away, you can justify it as a kid's cap gun or a late Chinese New Year celebration. But up close, you know what can happen or has happened with certainty. And that can be scary as shit.

I guess what I am getting at is: if you have any concept of these factors and the assault you create upon your own senses, you tend to shy away form using force unnecessarily. When you do resort to force, and you have thought it out at all, you do so as a last resort. Not because it's macho or because it would be without repercussions. You already know that to be untrue.

So why do people threaten musicians who voice their own opinions? What's so horrible about words that you might disagree with? At the end of the day, I think people who make those types of threats have a hard time believing in what they profess to believe and it's easier to wipe the speaker of trutrh off the face of the earth than revisit their own beliefs they have obviously made central enough to their lives to kill for.

I think Bush falls under that same category. He knew according to the secret memo that SH didn't have WMD's. He still wanted to invade. He wanted to kill. To crush SH. We just don't understand why completely yet. Maybe long after that snot-nosed mutherfucker is dead, we'll find something in his Presidential library.

I also think that same rationale applies to Nos. 3, 4 and 5. Better to kill the fag than question why you're getting aroused. It's also better to kill a Prime Minister (the second by the way for that nation) than to admit that most Israelis and Palestinians want to live in peace. It sure would cut the defense and religious industries profits, huh? And it's also easier to say someone is crazy or to cut off their head than accept the reality that Malik won't be fasting with you anymore until sundown. He'll be hunting Easter eggs in three weeks.

Was the fear of being different, or being perceived as different worth killing for? Was hate of a different tribe important enough to kill a leader of a nation, a husband, a father? Is it important enough for everyone to wear the same robes and celebrate the same holidays to kill a man who has been a friend and neighbor?

I can understand the biological imperative to breed as much as possible, and I can understand the biological imperative to herd with like-minded (or colored) animals, but this shit's just too fucked up even for me. But it's not for a lot of people obviously which is why I will write that book (or screenplay) soon.

I could make a fucking fortune. And if I understood why people act like this I could make even more.

Hey, maybe that's why Karl Rove still has a job.....


Blogger Freedem said...

All the leftys have written that book. I feel every day like somebody hijacked my reality and stuffed me in some bad novel.

I keep thinking that if someone could just write it all out and send it to Georue Orwell, or maybe they did and he just re-edited it to make it believable. The real facts certainly would not be believable in his day, John Brunner came closer, but could give Pollyanna a depression.

7:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home