"So long as you're willing to put up with me, I'll put up with anything you do.
However, if you start getting all 'zero-tolerance' jackboot with me, I'll take that to be a 'declaration of war' on me."
...hopefully a "cold war" and not a "full-frontal" type conflict.
The way most people are brought up in this culture:
to be self-important, self-righteous, despotic and domineering...
...obsessed with what they "have a right to" do, say, or go and be.
Everything is about their "rights" and entitlements...always deserving the best, always unconditionally entitled to "respect" and consideration (even when not returning the same themselves)---with "the right to" retaliate in a strongarm manner (or enlist someone else to do so on their behalf) or make extortionistic threats to take such actions ("You have a right to defend yourself." "Don't let anybody mess with you." "Stand your ground---you're #1: remember that.") if anyone should dare do or say anything unpleasant or "offensive" to them, always "right all the time"---if they like something (book, movie, song, TV show, etc) it's because it's great...if something doesn't appeal to them that means it's either crappy or something's wrong with it---they don't have "opinions" or "viewpoints" like others...they're smart and sane enough to tell what's "meritable" and what's either "disposible" or "mediocre"---if they decide they "don't like you" it's probably because of some "character flaw" on your part and not because of any prejudices or judgmentalisms they themselves may have (of course they're not "prejudice"---they're perfect, remember?), and always "in charge"---they "own everything" (the streets; the sidewalks; the aisles in stores, restaurants, laundromats) and you're always forced to either move around them or to get out of their way...
Sure, people are also taught about their "responsibilities" and "duties", but mainly as an "aside"---sort of like such things are among the "Catch-22"s of life, among the things to be suffered and disdained, the "necessary evils".
Such upbringing produces a "civilian monarch" mindset in which one develops a smug self-assured demeanor in which they assume they "deserve" whatever may be desirable or appealing to them, with covetry and jealousy for anyone who has whatever it may be that they desire which they don't possess---the feeling being along the lines of: "Why is THIS person 'more worthy' of having that than me? You know, I could put that item to better use than they ever could. I should certainly be just as entitled as they are to it!"
It also creates this "Me first!" mindset of the kind that characterizes the likes of "Black Friday" or the aggressive driving habits that sometimes culminate in "road rage" incidents.
But, even in the most benign situations and circumstances you'll see the "silent contempt" in a lot of people's faces and in their demeanor's and body language...kind of like an ongoing "cold civilian war" that occasionally erupts into a "full-frontal" conflict.
This type of social climate---where others are adversaries and intruders instead of "fellow humans"---also creates a paranoid and defensive mindset among it's many occupants.
And the need to "defend" or "protect" onself and one's loved ones or associates.
And also what creates a need for "revenge" against those who dare to "offend" or threaten you (whether said threats are real or imagined)
Those "needs" are also what brings about a market for devices which enable one to both "protect" oneself and attack those either threatening or who are deemed "offensive", thus creating an opportunity for those who provide such to start and run successful and profitable businesses catering to these tendencies found in such a great number of individuals.
And with that in mind, I think all this talk about "stricter gun control" or even "banishing" certain types of guns, while it all SOUNDS rational and idealistic, is way shortsighted. Even in the most unlikely event we actually would succeed in destroying the worst such weapons, we'd still be but creating yet another "prohibition" period, much like in the 1930s or with the "war-on-drugs".
The black market would not only pick up where the now-defunct legitimate companies left off, but all those assault rifles and such would eventually reappear on the streets again as the technology and knowledge, once developed, will never disappear...so the means and materials to rebuild and recreate such will always be an omnipresence. Part of the price one pays for "progress".
And with human nature always being part of us, along with the mantras of "individual rights" and "personal rights" being preached as part of cultural norms and tradition further enhancing narcissism, hedonism, and hubris, there will always be the market for any kind of weapons of defense-and-attack, "the more effective the better".
And someone's going to the beneficiary of such a social and business climate. It's simply a question of who they will be.
A ban on even the worst type of weapons, while appealing in the idealistic and moral sense, will only backfire and create another "prohibition period" with all the iniquities associated with such.
However, if you start getting all 'zero-tolerance' jackboot with me, I'll take that to be a 'declaration of war' on me."
...hopefully a "cold war" and not a "full-frontal" type conflict.
The way most people are brought up in this culture:
to be self-important, self-righteous, despotic and domineering...
...obsessed with what they "have a right to" do, say, or go and be.
Everything is about their "rights" and entitlements...always deserving the best, always unconditionally entitled to "respect" and consideration (even when not returning the same themselves)---with "the right to" retaliate in a strongarm manner (or enlist someone else to do so on their behalf) or make extortionistic threats to take such actions ("You have a right to defend yourself." "Don't let anybody mess with you." "Stand your ground---you're #1: remember that.") if anyone should dare do or say anything unpleasant or "offensive" to them, always "right all the time"---if they like something (book, movie, song, TV show, etc) it's because it's great...if something doesn't appeal to them that means it's either crappy or something's wrong with it---they don't have "opinions" or "viewpoints" like others...they're smart and sane enough to tell what's "meritable" and what's either "disposible" or "mediocre"---if they decide they "don't like you" it's probably because of some "character flaw" on your part and not because of any prejudices or judgmentalisms they themselves may have (of course they're not "prejudice"---they're perfect, remember?), and always "in charge"---they "own everything" (the streets; the sidewalks; the aisles in stores, restaurants, laundromats) and you're always forced to either move around them or to get out of their way...
Sure, people are also taught about their "responsibilities" and "duties", but mainly as an "aside"---sort of like such things are among the "Catch-22"s of life, among the things to be suffered and disdained, the "necessary evils".
Such upbringing produces a "civilian monarch" mindset in which one develops a smug self-assured demeanor in which they assume they "deserve" whatever may be desirable or appealing to them, with covetry and jealousy for anyone who has whatever it may be that they desire which they don't possess---the feeling being along the lines of: "Why is THIS person 'more worthy' of having that than me? You know, I could put that item to better use than they ever could. I should certainly be just as entitled as they are to it!"
It also creates this "Me first!" mindset of the kind that characterizes the likes of "Black Friday" or the aggressive driving habits that sometimes culminate in "road rage" incidents.
But, even in the most benign situations and circumstances you'll see the "silent contempt" in a lot of people's faces and in their demeanor's and body language...kind of like an ongoing "cold civilian war" that occasionally erupts into a "full-frontal" conflict.
This type of social climate---where others are adversaries and intruders instead of "fellow humans"---also creates a paranoid and defensive mindset among it's many occupants.
And the need to "defend" or "protect" onself and one's loved ones or associates.
And also what creates a need for "revenge" against those who dare to "offend" or threaten you (whether said threats are real or imagined)
Those "needs" are also what brings about a market for devices which enable one to both "protect" oneself and attack those either threatening or who are deemed "offensive", thus creating an opportunity for those who provide such to start and run successful and profitable businesses catering to these tendencies found in such a great number of individuals.
And with that in mind, I think all this talk about "stricter gun control" or even "banishing" certain types of guns, while it all SOUNDS rational and idealistic, is way shortsighted. Even in the most unlikely event we actually would succeed in destroying the worst such weapons, we'd still be but creating yet another "prohibition" period, much like in the 1930s or with the "war-on-drugs".
The black market would not only pick up where the now-defunct legitimate companies left off, but all those assault rifles and such would eventually reappear on the streets again as the technology and knowledge, once developed, will never disappear...so the means and materials to rebuild and recreate such will always be an omnipresence. Part of the price one pays for "progress".
And with human nature always being part of us, along with the mantras of "individual rights" and "personal rights" being preached as part of cultural norms and tradition further enhancing narcissism, hedonism, and hubris, there will always be the market for any kind of weapons of defense-and-attack, "the more effective the better".
And someone's going to the beneficiary of such a social and business climate. It's simply a question of who they will be.
A ban on even the worst type of weapons, while appealing in the idealistic and moral sense, will only backfire and create another "prohibition period" with all the iniquities associated with such.
No comments:
Post a Comment