Some Thoughts on Veteran's Day
Current mood: aggravated
Category: Life
One of my dear friends has listed in her status update the goodly thought that we should all go out and hug a veteran today. Well.....sure. I mean, hugs are nice. Hugs make us all feel good. Why not?
But, while we're at it, let's keep some basic stuff in mind.....we Americans are great at talking the talk but we're terrible about walking the walk. We use holidays like Veteran's Day and Memorial Day as outs for terrible behavior the rest of the year. When we feel bad we point to these days and say, "Really! Really! Vets are important!" The truth of the matter is, no. No they're not. We Americans really don't give a shit.
If we did, we might not have over 100,000 veterans homeless in America. For those keeping score at home, that's roughly 3x the number of troops President Obama is planning to send to Afghanistan. If all 100,000 or so homeless vets lived in Albuquerque, they'd amount to 1 in 5, or, 20% of our population.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21678030/
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/02/homeless.veterans/index.html
Now, I'm sorry, but today's a day of parades and platitudes and all that is well and fine but the above numbers and stories just reveal that for what it is. Total and complete bullshit. If we cared about the men and women who protect our country we'd do something better by them. Veteran's Day? How about renaming today 1/4 of the Homeless in America Day? Because, according to the stats, it's one in the same.
One of the sad things about the way we treat veterans is the way we pay lip service to their needs when they come home from war.
For starters, maybe we can stop jailing traumatized vets and actually helping them? After all, they have killed, maimed both enemies and innocents while watching their own comrades be killed and maimed, all for us and the freedoms we so blithely take for granted. You have rush hour traffic to contend with, they.....they have suicide bombers who send body parts and human viscera spraying in a multitude of directions.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=9350
But of course, taking care of our veterans means taking care of ALL of our veterans, men AND women alike. Yeah. Women. They're the phantom veterans we don't see and don't really think about. The result of their not being on our collective social radar....?
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/03/07/women_in_military/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/06/AR2005050601355.html
and
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/14/veterans.hospitals/
Our lady soldiers get raped.....by their own colleagues. Yeah. Some of our veterans on this Veteran's Day are rapists....and some.....are rape survivors. And for the women who come home, facing all sorts of post-traumatic stress issues, apparently, we fall short of caring for them.
And don't forget that not that long ago, one of our biggest, most prestigious veteran's hospitals did a bang-up job at.....neglecting these self same veterans we cherish today.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/17/AR2007021701172.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7584958
And for those who are trying to help those affected by the way.....just listening is almost as much hell as war is itself.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/us/08stress.html
In fact, the mental trauma of troops and counselors is so bad and so intense, we may be seeing more episodes like the recent one at Ft. Hood, in our future:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hVZbIGcvN1SNL7RcoIXoOofbXDfQ
Meanwhile, besides the psychological trauma, more of our veterans are returning to us as wounded, especially from Afghanistan.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jAPwZtMDyVLOSpu55GZhhsN0eiewD9BT70I00
So.....please, hug yourself a vet today. But, while you're at it, write a senator or a congressman and actually involve yourself in doing something. Don't just go to the paraded and sing some patriotic songs and feel all mushy inside about how great you and our veterans are. Actually do a damn thing for somebody.....like, say, the 100,000+ vets who are homeless. That would make this a Veteran's Day that actually has some meaning....
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Saturday, November 7, 2009
The Fading Light of Fall
Death is stalking you, all the time. Ever think of that? Life is like a horror movie, a Final Destination for all of us. With Death stalking us, quietly, stealthily from the shadows. A cat to our mice. One by one our friends are snared, nabbed, killed, sometimes before our very eyes, often, out of sight, word reaching us by phone call, by email, in a small blurb in the obituaries. But nabbed all the same. Taken by a faceless predator prowling about, seeking us, seeking us all.
We dodge. We weave. We seek to avoid and to extend. We want to keep going. We don’t want to get caught. We want to live. Unlike with Freddy, or Jason, or Michael Meyers, there’s no surviving in the end. Not for anyone. Ever. There’s no escaping. Death gets us all in the end. No matter what.
In the meantime, we try to forget. We try and buy this or do t hat, to feel better about the temporary status of our lives. That 52” LCD TV though, it doesn’t help when we are laid out in our casket. It won’t fit, for one thing. We can’t take it with us. When the lights go out, the TV show that is our lives goes off the air…..forever. All that we’ve bought. All that we’ve done. Gone. So much crinkly leaves scattered down the streets of time by the winds of change, skittering, scattering across the pavement, breaking apart, piece by piece, bit by bit, until there’s nothing left.
The worries pile up. We’re scared of this. Of that. We feel incomplete. Imperfect. Unloved. We want this, or that, in hopes that we’ll feel better. That we’ll forget for just a little while that we’re only here….for a little while.
I’m not pretty enough. No one will love me. I need to be prettier. If I’m not pretty, no one will notice me. I’ll drift through life, alone. Unwanted. Uncared for.
My boobs aren’t good enough. One’s an A cup. One’s a B cup. I’m a lopsided freak of nature! I’m proof that not all of nature’s creations are beautiful or well formed. I want DD’s. I want big jiggly breasts that a man can lust for. That a man will be stupid for. I want. I want.
I don’t have enough money. I need more. My pants, there’s so 2007. I need to be up to date. My car’s paint is fading. It’s getting old. I need a new car. I need something better. Something newer. Something fresh. I want to be cutting edge. I want to have the good stuff. I’m tired of having the hand me downs. I don’t want the leftovers. I want to be new. I want to be shiny.
The leaves fall and scatter about. Some red. Some orange. Some gold. All were new and shiny, just a few months back. Now, they are dead. Dying. Going, going gone. They fall about, lay about, waiting to be blown hither and thither. The short winter days shedding light on them for just a brief time, the light of the winter’s sun, like the light of our lives, only shining brightly for a short time, bookended in darkness, in nothingness.
The marble tomb encases the former baron of industry. His Ferrari and his Rolls now belong to another. The tomb is airtight. Or, it is, in the beginning. Above ground. Sealed around the doubly airtight coffin. Preserving the baron’s remains from being exposed to the air outside. To decay. He’s gone now, all of him that matters. What’s left is properly called his “remains”. Sealed, for all of eternity, or, for what passes as eternity in human minds. Worm free. Resting quietly in a tomb of marble, a tomb that itself will be weathered and whittled down over time. Over time.
Fall is the season of dying, winter, the season of death. As they come upon us it’s impossible not to think of these things, in the slanted light of the late afternoon. The day ending sooner and sooner. And sooner. Death. Dying. It’s why we party for Christmas, the non-birthday of the non-Messiah, days after the winter solstice, during what had once been the great Roman festival of Saturnalia. We party, lighting the candles, imbibing the wine, roasting marshmallows in the fire. We party to stave off the dark, the dying of the year, the loneliness that creeps into our hearts as we realize time is still moving, ever moving, going forward, dragging us along with it. Another year gone. Loved ones, lost. The unknown of the future staring us in the eyes as we go forward into the new. Over and over again, we go through it, a dance, a dance of life and time. Following the moves, repeating the motions. Until…..we don’t. Ever again.
The happiest mouse is….the mouse that thinks about the cat? Or the mouse that ignores the cat is there and focuses on the taste of the cheese?
We dodge. We weave. We seek to avoid and to extend. We want to keep going. We don’t want to get caught. We want to live. Unlike with Freddy, or Jason, or Michael Meyers, there’s no surviving in the end. Not for anyone. Ever. There’s no escaping. Death gets us all in the end. No matter what.
In the meantime, we try to forget. We try and buy this or do t hat, to feel better about the temporary status of our lives. That 52” LCD TV though, it doesn’t help when we are laid out in our casket. It won’t fit, for one thing. We can’t take it with us. When the lights go out, the TV show that is our lives goes off the air…..forever. All that we’ve bought. All that we’ve done. Gone. So much crinkly leaves scattered down the streets of time by the winds of change, skittering, scattering across the pavement, breaking apart, piece by piece, bit by bit, until there’s nothing left.
The worries pile up. We’re scared of this. Of that. We feel incomplete. Imperfect. Unloved. We want this, or that, in hopes that we’ll feel better. That we’ll forget for just a little while that we’re only here….for a little while.
I’m not pretty enough. No one will love me. I need to be prettier. If I’m not pretty, no one will notice me. I’ll drift through life, alone. Unwanted. Uncared for.
My boobs aren’t good enough. One’s an A cup. One’s a B cup. I’m a lopsided freak of nature! I’m proof that not all of nature’s creations are beautiful or well formed. I want DD’s. I want big jiggly breasts that a man can lust for. That a man will be stupid for. I want. I want.
I don’t have enough money. I need more. My pants, there’s so 2007. I need to be up to date. My car’s paint is fading. It’s getting old. I need a new car. I need something better. Something newer. Something fresh. I want to be cutting edge. I want to have the good stuff. I’m tired of having the hand me downs. I don’t want the leftovers. I want to be new. I want to be shiny.
The leaves fall and scatter about. Some red. Some orange. Some gold. All were new and shiny, just a few months back. Now, they are dead. Dying. Going, going gone. They fall about, lay about, waiting to be blown hither and thither. The short winter days shedding light on them for just a brief time, the light of the winter’s sun, like the light of our lives, only shining brightly for a short time, bookended in darkness, in nothingness.
The marble tomb encases the former baron of industry. His Ferrari and his Rolls now belong to another. The tomb is airtight. Or, it is, in the beginning. Above ground. Sealed around the doubly airtight coffin. Preserving the baron’s remains from being exposed to the air outside. To decay. He’s gone now, all of him that matters. What’s left is properly called his “remains”. Sealed, for all of eternity, or, for what passes as eternity in human minds. Worm free. Resting quietly in a tomb of marble, a tomb that itself will be weathered and whittled down over time. Over time.
Fall is the season of dying, winter, the season of death. As they come upon us it’s impossible not to think of these things, in the slanted light of the late afternoon. The day ending sooner and sooner. And sooner. Death. Dying. It’s why we party for Christmas, the non-birthday of the non-Messiah, days after the winter solstice, during what had once been the great Roman festival of Saturnalia. We party, lighting the candles, imbibing the wine, roasting marshmallows in the fire. We party to stave off the dark, the dying of the year, the loneliness that creeps into our hearts as we realize time is still moving, ever moving, going forward, dragging us along with it. Another year gone. Loved ones, lost. The unknown of the future staring us in the eyes as we go forward into the new. Over and over again, we go through it, a dance, a dance of life and time. Following the moves, repeating the motions. Until…..we don’t. Ever again.
The happiest mouse is….the mouse that thinks about the cat? Or the mouse that ignores the cat is there and focuses on the taste of the cheese?
Jesus is Just The Boss' Kid
I was thinking about this the other day and it hit me. Jesus is just The Big Boss’ kid. I was floored when I thought of him this way. It totally makes sense, of course. It’s been there all this time. But it was a way of looking at Jesus that I’d never once considered before. Jesus, just the Boss’ kid.
We all know stories of rich, powerful, successful men who start companies and promote their son’s to important positions within the corporation. Occasionally, the son being promoted is a talented, competent individual who can not only do the job he’s promoted to, but actually excel at it. Many times, however, the son owes his position strictly to his relationship with The Big Boss, his dad. This is actually a model we can use for looking at Jesus and his role in Heaven.
Now, one might object to this way of thinking. Many Christians, I think would. For many, if not most Christians, Jesus is the Lord and Savior. But, is he, really? Is he really the Lord? Isn’t God the Lord? I mean, after all, God is the one that created the universe. He created Earth too. And man. Woman too. Heaven. Hell. The angels. Everything, really. It’s quite a resume. Jesus created…..? Yeah. Exactly. Nothing. Not a darn thing. So, his case for being “Lord” is kinda’ shaky, just from an experiential point of view. In fact, one can argue that, not only is Jesus not “the Lord” but he’s also, not all that special in his own right.
Now, a lot of Christians would step up right about now to object and argue that Jesus’ miracles are proof of his specialness. It’s a compelling argument on the surface. He raised Lazarus from the dead, turned water into wine, cured a leper, gave sight to the blind…..amazing stuff. But did he do these things on his own or did he do them with the help of his dad, God? It’s a good question. Let’s say, for the time being, that Jesus’ miracles are actually Acts of God and that God merely used Jesus as his instrument to perform these acts. One could say that by being chosen as God’s instrument Jesus is still very special but, actually, lots of people have served God as his instrument. Samson has God to thank for his great strength, right? King David was an instrument of God. Daniel, too. All served God in their own way, be it with wisdom or courage or just pure brute strength. Of course, none of them has Jesus’ resume, so, it’s easy to write their service off. But, what about someone like Noah? No Noah, no need for Jesus. Ever think of that? If God hadn’t entrusted Noah with keeping Earth going at the time of The Great Flood, all his creation would’ve been destroyed, man included. If he wiped the slate 100% clean, then there'd have been no need for Jesus’ sacrifice later. Jesus wouldn’t have ever mattered.
Then there’s the case of Moses. Moses turned a staff into a snake, no? Parted the Red Sea too. Pretty impressive stuff. Only, we know that Moses did nothing on his own. All of Moses’ “magic” is the result of God working through him, of God using Moses as his instrument. Perhaps this same scenario was at work with Jesus. Maybe Jesus didn’t turn any water into wine, maybe God did, acting through his son. God has a history of acting through human agents that extends way beyond the Bible and its records.
From the 19th Century onwards, we have story after story of evangelical Christian preachers and ministers “laying on the hands”, healing the sick, giving sight to the blind, helping the lame to walk. Now, we might not take these stories at face value. To be sure, there have been some Christian charlatans out there who’ve faked their own “miracles”. But, that said, for those cases we see as true, it’s just further evidence of God working through instruments. I’ve never heard a preacher or minister claim that their own godlike powers helped heal the sick or restore sight to the blind, always they’ve credited God with the “miracle”, simply giving themselves credit of performing an assist. The Catholics do the same, of course. When a priest performs an exorcism and drives out a demon, he’s not the one actually doing the driving out, God is. The priest is simply working as God’s instrument in performing the act.
So, it’s very possible that Jesus had no powers himself and that everything he ever did he did as an instrument of God. It was God who raised Lazarus. It was God who cured a leper. Jesus was just the tool God used to get the work done. Clearly there’s precedence for that sort of thing, as we’ve already seen above. But, what does that do to the image of Jesus?
Well, if Jesus didn’t do anything, and he was merely God’s instrument, he’s hardly that important then, is he? It’s hard to think of him as “The Lord” if he didn’t actually do anything. He may be God’s son, but, like the son who owes his position to his dad’s power, Jesus is a rather impotent figure, incapable of doing anything on his own.
But, Jesus is actually half God, right? He got half of his DNA from God. Half from Mary, human DNA, and half from God, divine DNA. (Makes him rather like Obama in being bi-racial, kinda’, don’t you think?) If he has half God DNA in him, doesn’t it stand to reason that he’s not a normal man, but, rather, like, a semi-God? He’d have his own powers then, wouldn’t he? Powers he could use as he saw fit, to raise the dead, to cure the sick, to create an instant winery. This is a plausible explanation for Jesus’ powers based on his parentage. Makes sense. But, even here we run into some problems.
First off, if Jesus has his own powers, he’s not really a man and his sacrifice, the one thing that we all really owe him for, becomes less impressive. If he can raise the dead, he can raise himself. No problem. Hard to even say he’s dead, at least in a sense we’d understand. How dead can you be when you can cure death at any moment? Isn’t that a defining aspect of death, its permanence? If you’re 100% human and you sacrifice yourself for others, it’s a pretty powerful act. You are giving up all you have, and all you’ll ever have, for others. If you’ve got godlike powers and can raise yourself from the dead anytime you want, how impressive is that? Doesn’t it make your death a sham of sorts? A parlor trick? What sort of sacrifice are we talking about here?
Of course, we can go back to Jesus not having any powers of his own and argue that, even then, his sacrifice is flawed. He’s God’s kid, right? And he knows it. So, what kind of sacrifice is he making, really? He knows he’s going to be with his dad in Heaven. He knows that with the sort of certainty no human has. There’s absolutely no chance Jesus is going to Hell after he dies. He’s merely going home. The human uncertainty in regards to death and what comes after is one of the things that defines us as who we are. If we all knew what happened and what would happen to us, a lot of us might well choose death over life and shuck off this mortal coil. But the not knowing is what makes one sacrificing their life so special. This doesn’t apply to Jesus, as we’ve seen. He knows what’s coming up, even if we assume he had no power to do anything about it.
If Jesus has his own powers, this may be problematic for his sacrifice and resurrection, but, what about his “Lord” status? It’d help that though, wouldn’t it? Well…..not really. Where’d Jesus get his powers from? His dad, God. Who’s more powerful, Jesus or God? Well, God, obviously. Even if he has his own powers, Jesus can’t do anything that God doesn’t okay. Let’s say God wanted Jesus to change water into lemonade, instead of wine. Jesus wants wine. Who’s going to win that tug of war? God, of course. If there’s a disagreement as to whether someone gets into Heaven, Jesus might argue eloquently one way or another but, in the end, it’s always God’s say.
One way around all this is to say that God and Jesus are the same, but, that doesn’t work out either, does it. If Jesus is God, then he can’t be his own son and he can’t be a human being who sacrifices himself for other human beings simply because he’s, well, God. So, arguing that Jesus is “the Lord” is, well, problematic. He’s not really “the Lord” of anything. What he is is the Big Boss’ son and, as such, a company representative.
When God sends Jesus down to Earth, we can see this as akin to a mafia don sending his son on a mission to the local deli to straighten things out. God, like the mafia don, is frustrated with the state of things. He counts on his #1 guy, his blood, his kid, to work out a resolution that works. God does this by figuring that if anyone can fix things on Earth, it’s his kiddo. He sends Jesus on a mission, as his personal representative. Once on Earth, Jesus does the job of representing quite well. He preaches his father’s word. He performs miracles. He gets people excited about his dad’s message and product. As a salesperson for his father, Jesus does quite a good job. As a fixer though, he’s not that great. He isn’t able to change things the way he might want, or the way God might want. To save his mission, he sacrifices himself so that his dad will take it easy on the rest of humanity. The Big Boss needed someone’s head to roll. It was either going to be his kid or everybody else. He settled for his kid.
Of course, why God would need to send a rep to straighten things out is kind of hard to figure. Things were bad once before. God sent a flood. The flood led to a Earth do-over and then, many years later, tadah! We’re right back where we were the first time. So, God sent his kid to fix it. But, of course, being all knowing and all powerful, God could’ve fixed it anytime he wanted. Any time. Just like that! Snap of the fingers. He is God, after all. He may have thought that putting a human face out there would be better, you know, to work with. Maybe humans would be more receptive to a human messenger. Hence, the need to send his kid. And, as a messenger and a salesman, Jesus excelled. He was very good about getting people hyped about the product and the message. He’s still the ultimate salesperson even today. He couldn’t get the change he wanted by simply selling and representing though, so, he had to give himself, literally body and soul, for the rest of us.
If we look at Jesus this way, as the heroic salesman who sacrifices himself for all of us, he sort of comes out looking really good. It’s understandable why we all feel strongly for him. We owe him one. But even here, there are problems. God stands outside of time. Imagine that. For God, the past, the present and the future are all viewable, at any time. Just like that. So, if God is outside of time and unaffected by time you could argue that he’s always known how everything would go do down from before time even began. If that’s so, he knew all about Jesus’ sacrifice and how he wasn’t going to destroy humanity all over again and that, through his son’s sacrifice he’d grant humans eternal life in the Kingdom of Heaven, all before anything ever happened. Hard to be a hero if everything was pre-ordained to begin with. God, as the Author of the Universe, knew the entire story before he even wrote it down. Kinda’ anti-climactic.
This anti-climax applies to the end of the world as we know it as well. Jesus will step in, after Judgment Day and the Resurrection, to rule Heaven on Earth. Here’s another instance of people giving Jesus “Lord”-like powers. It sounds really exciting and wonderful but, like so much of what we think of when we think of Jesus, it’s simply not true. Jesus may very well rule Heaven on Earth but he rules it at his father’s discretion. It’s only because God lets Jesus rule anything that he does. Think of Star Wars if you will. Darth Vader rules many things but he only rules them because Emperor Palpatine lets him. Same deal here with Jesus and his pop, God. Heaven on Earth won’t be the Kingdom of Christ, it’ll be the Kingdom of God, where God let’s his kid hang out and seem like he’s doing something. Not too unlike The Big Boss giving his son some important sounding project and title at the company just to help make him look good.
When we think of Jesus we get all worked up and misty-eyed thinking about some very important being, a VIB if you will. But, in reality, Jesus isn’t anything more than the boss’ kid. That’s it. He has no power of his own, and, even if he does, he can’t use it without his dad’s permission. His sacrifice was possibly a sham, if he had his own powers, and not much of a real sacrifice, even if he didn’t. He can’t lead Heaven on Earth at the end of times because, at best, he’s merely the company representative, the PR man, the face of God, Inc.. Many think of Jesus as Lord but really, he’s an eternal heir in waiting, doomed to always serve his father, waiting for the keys to the Throne of Heaven to become his and forever being denied. Jesus, after all, is just The Big Boss’ son. And The Big Boss is forever.
Belief in God is Undemocratic
If you believe in God, you don’t believe in democratic principles. Have you ever thought of that? No? It’s true. A belief in God is philosophically at odds with a belief in democracy and democratic ideals. In fact, it helps to explain why, over the vast sweep of human civilization, democracy has been such a rare form of government. True story.
Democracy just doesn’t happen that often in human history. By contrast, most of human history has seen government in the form of monarchy. Kings and queens and emperors fill the world history pages because they are the government humans prefer, far above any other. Certainly, far above democracy. Belief in an all-powerful God, or, at least, a Supreme Deity, goes hand in hand with this preference for one person rule. And, when monarchies fell out of favor, dictatorships took their place. The one Supreme Ruler model continued, only in a slightly different form.
A look at Christianity supports this view that one person rule, either monarchic or dictatorial is the way to go for most people. After all, what is God if not a benevolent dictator? God doesn’t follow democratic principles. He’s immune to democratic concerns. It’s his way or the highway. There is no appeal from God’s decisions and there are no checks and balances on his power. He is Supreme. God rules all just the same way a king, an emperor or a dictator would. Like a king or a dictator though, God can’t do it alone. Which is odd, really, when you think of God being all powerful. I mean, if you’re all powerful, why would you need any help at all? Seriously. If you’re all powerful, you have no need for servants. You can do it all by yourself. Servants are extraneous. But, in the most familiar Christian models God has his underlings, his king’s court or dictator’s inner posse, if you will, there to help him do his bidding. He has angels, all created to serve him, like some celestial Nazi SS. They protect God and fight for him (though, who or what they protect him from is never really explained). They’re God’s Knights of the Round Table, his Roman Praetorian Guard his Iraqi Republican Guard all rolled into one with wings. God’s angels, are superior to humans, like a good aristocracy or ruling class should be. They exist to do God’s bidding (though, again, this seems redundant since God can do everything himself) and they are uber loyal. Well, most of them. Except for those who aren’t. But even fallen angels like Lucifer are superior to humans and part of the aristocracy/ruling class, just, you know, in an opposing camp ideology-wise.
Of course, what is a king without a prince? And, in Christianity, God has his prince in the form of Jesus Christ, his son viz a viz Mary. What’s interesting about Christianity is that it’s a religion built around the worship of an ultimately impotent sidekick. That’s all Jesus is, really, and yet many Christians worship him as “Lord”. Jesus has no power save the power God allows him, just as the prince has no power save the power allotted him by the king. Jesus isn’t God, he couldn’t be for his sacrifice on the cross to be meaningful. Only by being human could he die on the cross and sacrifice himself for all us other humans and since he’s not God, he can’t really be “the Lord” either because he’s not number one. He’s a perpetual number 2. An eternal vice president without any hope of getting the top job. That’s not so say that the prince can’t rule the kingdom. A king may let his son call the shots. God could let Jesus rule his heavenly kingdom while he went fishing, let’s say. But even in this scenario the real power is the king’s, or God’s, not his son’s.
I don’t know of any Christians who have a problem with doing what God says. Not a single one. God says you do something, well, “God’s will be done.” Even if what he says to do makes no sense, well, “God works in mysterious ways”. Christians are cool with being bossed around by a Heavenly king who tells them what to do, how to do it and so on without so much as a debate with his subjects. Ever notice that? God never asks anyone for their opinion. Ever. He never asks for advice. From anybody. This was, according to some traditions, Lucifer’s big beef. God was too, well, godlike. Of course, God never has to have debates or ask for advice because God is all-knowing, and completely good. But like any good king or dictator, God has a dark side. He claims to be at war with Evil, in the form of Lucifer, aka Satan, but it’s a fake war, a war that is staged to keep his subjects in line and loyal to him. It’s the sort of war kings and dictators have fought since time began, a war meant to unite the kingdom or the tribe or the country against the dangers of the “other”. God doesn’t really need a war, in fact, the war God is fighting is all style over substance. He’s God. He made Lucifer and all his fallen angel cohorts and can snuff them out at any moment with his thumb. It’s a war in name only, this war between Heaven and Hell, it’s a war that Lucifer is incapable of winning because he is, by definition, inferior to God, so, in fighting this war, it’s all absurd theater. In fact, one can argue that Lucifer knows he doesn’t stand a chance but he fights the war anyway, the same way Sisyphus pushes the rock up the hill anyway, knowing full well that the rock will fall back down to the base of the hill every time, all the same.
Belief in God, as outlined above, is all centered around the belief in one all powerful ruler who’s never wrong. It also is a belief in natural inequality. While democracies may preach the virtues of people being equal, underneath it all, no one really believe in that. God has created an unequal universe. There’s him, sitting at the top. His son, just below him. Then there are his angels, both the Warriors of Light, on his side and the fallen ones who hang in darkness, all of whom are naturally superior to man.
But even within mankind, God has created an unequal order. There are saints and mystics and holy men all over the place, humans endowed with a more direct line to God than the rest of us. The Pope, is a great example. So too,ayatollahs in Shi’a Islam. The President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is another example of this as well. Men who have a direct line to God. Who talk to God. Who feel his presence. In fact, when the Reformation happened, its initial goal was to make Christianity more democratic, to take it away from the hierarchical structures that the Catholic Church had created. That hasn’t happened. Protestant churches, by and large, revolve around a minster, a pastor, the one Big Man in Church, or, BMIC, who is the glue to the congregation. Even if it’s not directly stated, it’s implied that the pastor, the minister, the head preacher is not equal to the others in his flock by virtue of his position. He is better connected to God, better learned in Scripture, touched by the hand of Divine Authority in some way that separates him from everyone else. No equality here.
In a country with strong Christian tendencies it’s no surprise that we Americans follow this anti-democratic line of thinking within our own democracy. Take the US Senate, for instance. The Us Senate is now and has been throughout its history an elite institution. Joe Blow, the Garbage Man has no chance of being a senator. None. Nil. Senators are almost without exception all millionaires. There’s no real equality here. There’s people seeing a natural order where the rich and powerful have a right to rule, just as Christians see a natural right to rule as being implicit in God’s situation. Hey, the dude made the universe, seems fair he should be the one to call the shots, no? Families like the Bushes, the Kennedys, the Clintons, all wind up forming a natural aristocracy, supported by a ruling class awash in wealth and power. The rules are made for everyone else but them and most people grudgingly accept this as the state of things as they should be. Average people can’t’ run for office, only wealthy people can.
Most Americans favor a strong presidency and the most popular American presidents were the strongest, most forceful ones: Roosevelt, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan… We don’t really believe in equality because we believe the rich lead better lives than the poor, we believe that being rich and famous makes a person’s life more important, more meaningful. We create a structured order to our society that’s not too dissimilar to the order that is in Heaven. A strong father figure (the President) at the top and everyone else down below. Congress and the government play the role of angels, along with the wealthy ruling class, all serving the president. There is no real equality in life and, just like the theatrical War in Heaven between Lucifer and God, there is a bit of theater in the way we pretend to have a democracy. It’s a theater that’s consistent with what humans believe in and want from life, however. People want a strong Supreme Ruler. They don’t want equality. They don’t want democracy. They want firm solid rule. They want a king/dictator God and a king/dictator president. That’s how we are. That’s just how it goes.
Democracy just doesn’t happen that often in human history. By contrast, most of human history has seen government in the form of monarchy. Kings and queens and emperors fill the world history pages because they are the government humans prefer, far above any other. Certainly, far above democracy. Belief in an all-powerful God, or, at least, a Supreme Deity, goes hand in hand with this preference for one person rule. And, when monarchies fell out of favor, dictatorships took their place. The one Supreme Ruler model continued, only in a slightly different form.
A look at Christianity supports this view that one person rule, either monarchic or dictatorial is the way to go for most people. After all, what is God if not a benevolent dictator? God doesn’t follow democratic principles. He’s immune to democratic concerns. It’s his way or the highway. There is no appeal from God’s decisions and there are no checks and balances on his power. He is Supreme. God rules all just the same way a king, an emperor or a dictator would. Like a king or a dictator though, God can’t do it alone. Which is odd, really, when you think of God being all powerful. I mean, if you’re all powerful, why would you need any help at all? Seriously. If you’re all powerful, you have no need for servants. You can do it all by yourself. Servants are extraneous. But, in the most familiar Christian models God has his underlings, his king’s court or dictator’s inner posse, if you will, there to help him do his bidding. He has angels, all created to serve him, like some celestial Nazi SS. They protect God and fight for him (though, who or what they protect him from is never really explained). They’re God’s Knights of the Round Table, his Roman Praetorian Guard his Iraqi Republican Guard all rolled into one with wings. God’s angels, are superior to humans, like a good aristocracy or ruling class should be. They exist to do God’s bidding (though, again, this seems redundant since God can do everything himself) and they are uber loyal. Well, most of them. Except for those who aren’t. But even fallen angels like Lucifer are superior to humans and part of the aristocracy/ruling class, just, you know, in an opposing camp ideology-wise.
Of course, what is a king without a prince? And, in Christianity, God has his prince in the form of Jesus Christ, his son viz a viz Mary. What’s interesting about Christianity is that it’s a religion built around the worship of an ultimately impotent sidekick. That’s all Jesus is, really, and yet many Christians worship him as “Lord”. Jesus has no power save the power God allows him, just as the prince has no power save the power allotted him by the king. Jesus isn’t God, he couldn’t be for his sacrifice on the cross to be meaningful. Only by being human could he die on the cross and sacrifice himself for all us other humans and since he’s not God, he can’t really be “the Lord” either because he’s not number one. He’s a perpetual number 2. An eternal vice president without any hope of getting the top job. That’s not so say that the prince can’t rule the kingdom. A king may let his son call the shots. God could let Jesus rule his heavenly kingdom while he went fishing, let’s say. But even in this scenario the real power is the king’s, or God’s, not his son’s.
I don’t know of any Christians who have a problem with doing what God says. Not a single one. God says you do something, well, “God’s will be done.” Even if what he says to do makes no sense, well, “God works in mysterious ways”. Christians are cool with being bossed around by a Heavenly king who tells them what to do, how to do it and so on without so much as a debate with his subjects. Ever notice that? God never asks anyone for their opinion. Ever. He never asks for advice. From anybody. This was, according to some traditions, Lucifer’s big beef. God was too, well, godlike. Of course, God never has to have debates or ask for advice because God is all-knowing, and completely good. But like any good king or dictator, God has a dark side. He claims to be at war with Evil, in the form of Lucifer, aka Satan, but it’s a fake war, a war that is staged to keep his subjects in line and loyal to him. It’s the sort of war kings and dictators have fought since time began, a war meant to unite the kingdom or the tribe or the country against the dangers of the “other”. God doesn’t really need a war, in fact, the war God is fighting is all style over substance. He’s God. He made Lucifer and all his fallen angel cohorts and can snuff them out at any moment with his thumb. It’s a war in name only, this war between Heaven and Hell, it’s a war that Lucifer is incapable of winning because he is, by definition, inferior to God, so, in fighting this war, it’s all absurd theater. In fact, one can argue that Lucifer knows he doesn’t stand a chance but he fights the war anyway, the same way Sisyphus pushes the rock up the hill anyway, knowing full well that the rock will fall back down to the base of the hill every time, all the same.
Belief in God, as outlined above, is all centered around the belief in one all powerful ruler who’s never wrong. It also is a belief in natural inequality. While democracies may preach the virtues of people being equal, underneath it all, no one really believe in that. God has created an unequal universe. There’s him, sitting at the top. His son, just below him. Then there are his angels, both the Warriors of Light, on his side and the fallen ones who hang in darkness, all of whom are naturally superior to man.
But even within mankind, God has created an unequal order. There are saints and mystics and holy men all over the place, humans endowed with a more direct line to God than the rest of us. The Pope, is a great example. So too,ayatollahs in Shi’a Islam. The President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is another example of this as well. Men who have a direct line to God. Who talk to God. Who feel his presence. In fact, when the Reformation happened, its initial goal was to make Christianity more democratic, to take it away from the hierarchical structures that the Catholic Church had created. That hasn’t happened. Protestant churches, by and large, revolve around a minster, a pastor, the one Big Man in Church, or, BMIC, who is the glue to the congregation. Even if it’s not directly stated, it’s implied that the pastor, the minister, the head preacher is not equal to the others in his flock by virtue of his position. He is better connected to God, better learned in Scripture, touched by the hand of Divine Authority in some way that separates him from everyone else. No equality here.
In a country with strong Christian tendencies it’s no surprise that we Americans follow this anti-democratic line of thinking within our own democracy. Take the US Senate, for instance. The Us Senate is now and has been throughout its history an elite institution. Joe Blow, the Garbage Man has no chance of being a senator. None. Nil. Senators are almost without exception all millionaires. There’s no real equality here. There’s people seeing a natural order where the rich and powerful have a right to rule, just as Christians see a natural right to rule as being implicit in God’s situation. Hey, the dude made the universe, seems fair he should be the one to call the shots, no? Families like the Bushes, the Kennedys, the Clintons, all wind up forming a natural aristocracy, supported by a ruling class awash in wealth and power. The rules are made for everyone else but them and most people grudgingly accept this as the state of things as they should be. Average people can’t’ run for office, only wealthy people can.
Most Americans favor a strong presidency and the most popular American presidents were the strongest, most forceful ones: Roosevelt, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan… We don’t really believe in equality because we believe the rich lead better lives than the poor, we believe that being rich and famous makes a person’s life more important, more meaningful. We create a structured order to our society that’s not too dissimilar to the order that is in Heaven. A strong father figure (the President) at the top and everyone else down below. Congress and the government play the role of angels, along with the wealthy ruling class, all serving the president. There is no real equality in life and, just like the theatrical War in Heaven between Lucifer and God, there is a bit of theater in the way we pretend to have a democracy. It’s a theater that’s consistent with what humans believe in and want from life, however. People want a strong Supreme Ruler. They don’t want equality. They don’t want democracy. They want firm solid rule. They want a king/dictator God and a king/dictator president. That’s how we are. That’s just how it goes.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Carrie Underwood's "Before He Cheats"
Never liked the song. Wrote a little piece about it a ways back. Figured I'd at to this blog. Enjoy.
"Before He Cheats" and American Values
So, I heard Carrie Underwood's latest song the other day and, quite catchy, I dare say. It's a tale of love, a tale of betrayal, a tale of low standards and seedy behavior and, ultimately, a tale of revenge. A woman scorned, a woman who's love has been disrespected, who's trust has been betrayed, exacts revenge on her ex by trashing his beloved 4x4:
"I dug my key into the side of his pretty little suped up 4 wheel drive,
carved my name into his leather seat...
I took a Louisville slugger to both head lights,
slashed a hole in all 4 tires...
And maybe next time he'll think before he cheats."
Questions abound when reading the lyrics of this song. The big question, the main one that I come up asking, is, when did destroying someone else's property become an encouraged way of dealing with infidelity? Just a song, you say? Just a song? I think our songs, like our movies, our video games and, well, pretty much everything our culture produces is much more than what it seems to be. Any artistic effort that does well and is successful is basically being voted on and approved by society at large. The values, the messages, the themes of that artistic work, whatever they are, are basically rubber stamped by the public who spends money on that particular work of art, be it a song, a TV show, a YouTube video, or a feature film. In this case, it's interesting to examine what sort of values Carrie Underwood's song is promoting to society at large.
Basically, the message being portrayed in "Before He Cheats" is, if you get cheated on by a lover, it's okay to go out and trash there stuff. Now, I'm not here to defend cheating, but, I have to wonder as to when it became okay to destroy property in response to someone hurting your feelings? Because, any way you cut it, being cheated on only involves a betrayal of trust and a hurting of feelings.
Hurting of feelings, I say, am I trying to minimize the pain, the doubt, the despair that a woman who's been cheated on must be feeling? No. Not at all. Get betrayed, have your trust violated, it's powerful, visceral stuff. Getting cheated on by a man you've given you're whole heart to has to be utterly devastating. That said, is going out and destroying someone's car a fair trade?
One can argue that having a deep emotional hurt is something impossible to assign a dollar value on. How does one calculate, in dollars and cents, pain, emotional, gut-wrenching, soul killing, misery inducing pain? Destruction of a 4x4, in contrast, is easily calculated, money-wise. Each thing destroyed in the song, from the paint job to the headlights to the leather seats, has a real world dollar value that can be calculated. Is, at the end of the day, the misery a cheated on woman feels, worth the same as the sum of the repairs on a 4x4?
If it is, are we then saying that a woman's feelings are equal to the cost of repairing a truck? How insulting to a woman and her feelings. Sure, this is an expensive repair job for cheater guy, but, really, after a few thousand bucks, he's good to go. Will a woman, a woman who's been cheated on, betrayed, trust violated, feel better after a few thousand dollars of, say, shopping? Or, will it depend on where she goes and what she buys?
One of the troubling issues the song brings up is the issue of consequences. For the cheating man, the consequences of his actions are quite clear. Fuck with some women, get your 4x4 jacked all to hell. But, what for the song's main character, what are the consequences for the woman involved, if any? She sings the song with a carefree spirit that seems to indicate that she will get away with her actions. Criminally, she's likely to go scot-free. Yeah, she's carved her name into the leather seats and all, but property crimes usually have to have witnesses to get prosecuted. Assuming there was no parking lot camera to capture her vandalism, our betrayed lady in despair is not likely to face criminal charges. The name in the seats makes for great circumstantial evidence, but, a prosecution is probably not worth the cost. That said, the burden of proof in civil court is much lower than in criminal court. It's conceivable, though, doubtful, that our cheating man in the song may slap a lawsuit on his destructive ex for the cost of repairs. In a small town, where a civil trial would be the water cooler talk of the year, we can pretty much expect our cheating man to take his lumps quietly. Besides, why advertise any more than necessary that he's a cheater to any potential women he may be trying to hook up with later on down the road?
So, it looks pretty good for our scornful, vengeful woman, as far as being able to get away with her actions. Will trashing her cheating ex's truck really bring some level of satisfaction to her? Did she "win"? Good question. Her anger, her hurt, her despair, all probably got worked out of her on some level as she trashed her man's truck. But what next? What then? When she gets home and her endorphins stop pumping through her blood stream, what will she feel? Will she feel better? Will she feel somehow vindicated? I have to wonder. Do we ever really feel good after destroying someone else's stuff? Sure, maybe in the heat of the moment and the warm afterglow but, when tempers cool, when we get some time and space to think things over, I'm not so sure we feel that satisfied, and, thus, I doubt that our scorned woman will feel that great about herself in a week's time either. To be sure, she may convince herself that what she did was justified and maybe, maybe even pat herself on the back for her efforts. Does the pain, the confusion and the betrayal go away though? Is it somehow lessened because she trashed a 4x4? I doubt it. I expect our scorned woman is going to take a while to get over being cheated on. It's probably going to be some time before she feels comfortable enough trusting again and is willing to try getting into another relationship. I don't think trashing a truck is a panacea for what ails or main character in the song.
One thing I have to wonder about, in context of the song, is the state of the main character's self esteem. How good is it? On the one hand, it looks good enough to acknowledge that she's not going to stand for being cheated on and she's going to move on. But,if it was that good, why bother with trashing the guy's truck? I mean, if you believe in yourself, feel you're worthy of being loved and you're not going to stand for being lied to and deceived, why not just be rid of the guy and see him as so totally not worthy of your time in the first place? Why trash his stuff? Who needs that? He certainly isn't worthy of you in the first place, so, why stoop to being destructive? By questioning the main characters self-esteem, it's easy to question everything she says about her ex and what he may or may not be doing. Is she really, accurately describing her ex, or is she merely describing him the way she wants him to be, now that she's hurting, deceived and angry? Is he really into tramps? If so, what does that say about her? I mean, he was with her, wasn't he? Does that mean she is a tramp too? And if she isn't, and he's just suddenly acquired a taste for tramps, then, again, why destroy his truck? Obviously he's not "the one" with such low standards, you'd think the main character singing would be glad to be rid of the loser and see this as a real positive thing for her. If the guy's into tramps, and she's not one, he's certainly not worth her time.
We Americans don't like thinking much. Not our style, really. Good guys and bad guys, black and white, right and wrong. That's what it's all about. Yeah, our main character is "wrong" to destroy someone else's property, but, she's "right" to get back at the cheating, lying son-of-a-bitch that cheated on her. I can imagine a lot of people saying just that. Revenge, is good. We like revenge. It helps us not feel so powerless in our lives. When someone else does something that hurts us, something we don't like, it's frustrating since we have no power to keep them from doing it. But, we don have the power to strike back, to take revenge. In America, it's a beautiful thing. We like getting even, even if the feelings we have after often leave us hollow.
As an Atheist, I'm amused by the fact that this is a #1 song on the Country charts. Country music fans are often very religious, very Christian folk. America, like it or not, is a very Christian nation. That said, I wonder what Jesus of Nazareth's take on all this would be? I often wonder this, where my religious countrymen and women are concerned. He'd not be happy at cheating guy, I'm sure of that. Cheating is bad. But, I rather doubt that Jesus would be too down for trashing a guy's truck either. Not really a Christian thing to do, I'm thinking.
In America, in the 21st Century, one of the most important values we have is instant satisfaction. We want to be happy, and, we want it now. Doesn't matter if the happiness is temporary, if it is elusive, we want it just the same. Trashing a truck may not solve our scorned woman's problems, and, very well may leave her feeling lousy still in a week's time. But, for now, in the heated afterglow of revenge, she feels good, she feels powerful, she feels as if she's done the right thing. In American, feeling great, if even for just a second, is reason enough to do just about anything, even trash another person's stuff because, really, it's now that matters.
"Before He Cheats" and American Values
So, I heard Carrie Underwood's latest song the other day and, quite catchy, I dare say. It's a tale of love, a tale of betrayal, a tale of low standards and seedy behavior and, ultimately, a tale of revenge. A woman scorned, a woman who's love has been disrespected, who's trust has been betrayed, exacts revenge on her ex by trashing his beloved 4x4:
"I dug my key into the side of his pretty little suped up 4 wheel drive,
carved my name into his leather seat...
I took a Louisville slugger to both head lights,
slashed a hole in all 4 tires...
And maybe next time he'll think before he cheats."
Questions abound when reading the lyrics of this song. The big question, the main one that I come up asking, is, when did destroying someone else's property become an encouraged way of dealing with infidelity? Just a song, you say? Just a song? I think our songs, like our movies, our video games and, well, pretty much everything our culture produces is much more than what it seems to be. Any artistic effort that does well and is successful is basically being voted on and approved by society at large. The values, the messages, the themes of that artistic work, whatever they are, are basically rubber stamped by the public who spends money on that particular work of art, be it a song, a TV show, a YouTube video, or a feature film. In this case, it's interesting to examine what sort of values Carrie Underwood's song is promoting to society at large.
Basically, the message being portrayed in "Before He Cheats" is, if you get cheated on by a lover, it's okay to go out and trash there stuff. Now, I'm not here to defend cheating, but, I have to wonder as to when it became okay to destroy property in response to someone hurting your feelings? Because, any way you cut it, being cheated on only involves a betrayal of trust and a hurting of feelings.
Hurting of feelings, I say, am I trying to minimize the pain, the doubt, the despair that a woman who's been cheated on must be feeling? No. Not at all. Get betrayed, have your trust violated, it's powerful, visceral stuff. Getting cheated on by a man you've given you're whole heart to has to be utterly devastating. That said, is going out and destroying someone's car a fair trade?
One can argue that having a deep emotional hurt is something impossible to assign a dollar value on. How does one calculate, in dollars and cents, pain, emotional, gut-wrenching, soul killing, misery inducing pain? Destruction of a 4x4, in contrast, is easily calculated, money-wise. Each thing destroyed in the song, from the paint job to the headlights to the leather seats, has a real world dollar value that can be calculated. Is, at the end of the day, the misery a cheated on woman feels, worth the same as the sum of the repairs on a 4x4?
If it is, are we then saying that a woman's feelings are equal to the cost of repairing a truck? How insulting to a woman and her feelings. Sure, this is an expensive repair job for cheater guy, but, really, after a few thousand bucks, he's good to go. Will a woman, a woman who's been cheated on, betrayed, trust violated, feel better after a few thousand dollars of, say, shopping? Or, will it depend on where she goes and what she buys?
One of the troubling issues the song brings up is the issue of consequences. For the cheating man, the consequences of his actions are quite clear. Fuck with some women, get your 4x4 jacked all to hell. But, what for the song's main character, what are the consequences for the woman involved, if any? She sings the song with a carefree spirit that seems to indicate that she will get away with her actions. Criminally, she's likely to go scot-free. Yeah, she's carved her name into the leather seats and all, but property crimes usually have to have witnesses to get prosecuted. Assuming there was no parking lot camera to capture her vandalism, our betrayed lady in despair is not likely to face criminal charges. The name in the seats makes for great circumstantial evidence, but, a prosecution is probably not worth the cost. That said, the burden of proof in civil court is much lower than in criminal court. It's conceivable, though, doubtful, that our cheating man in the song may slap a lawsuit on his destructive ex for the cost of repairs. In a small town, where a civil trial would be the water cooler talk of the year, we can pretty much expect our cheating man to take his lumps quietly. Besides, why advertise any more than necessary that he's a cheater to any potential women he may be trying to hook up with later on down the road?
So, it looks pretty good for our scornful, vengeful woman, as far as being able to get away with her actions. Will trashing her cheating ex's truck really bring some level of satisfaction to her? Did she "win"? Good question. Her anger, her hurt, her despair, all probably got worked out of her on some level as she trashed her man's truck. But what next? What then? When she gets home and her endorphins stop pumping through her blood stream, what will she feel? Will she feel better? Will she feel somehow vindicated? I have to wonder. Do we ever really feel good after destroying someone else's stuff? Sure, maybe in the heat of the moment and the warm afterglow but, when tempers cool, when we get some time and space to think things over, I'm not so sure we feel that satisfied, and, thus, I doubt that our scorned woman will feel that great about herself in a week's time either. To be sure, she may convince herself that what she did was justified and maybe, maybe even pat herself on the back for her efforts. Does the pain, the confusion and the betrayal go away though? Is it somehow lessened because she trashed a 4x4? I doubt it. I expect our scorned woman is going to take a while to get over being cheated on. It's probably going to be some time before she feels comfortable enough trusting again and is willing to try getting into another relationship. I don't think trashing a truck is a panacea for what ails or main character in the song.
One thing I have to wonder about, in context of the song, is the state of the main character's self esteem. How good is it? On the one hand, it looks good enough to acknowledge that she's not going to stand for being cheated on and she's going to move on. But,if it was that good, why bother with trashing the guy's truck? I mean, if you believe in yourself, feel you're worthy of being loved and you're not going to stand for being lied to and deceived, why not just be rid of the guy and see him as so totally not worthy of your time in the first place? Why trash his stuff? Who needs that? He certainly isn't worthy of you in the first place, so, why stoop to being destructive? By questioning the main characters self-esteem, it's easy to question everything she says about her ex and what he may or may not be doing. Is she really, accurately describing her ex, or is she merely describing him the way she wants him to be, now that she's hurting, deceived and angry? Is he really into tramps? If so, what does that say about her? I mean, he was with her, wasn't he? Does that mean she is a tramp too? And if she isn't, and he's just suddenly acquired a taste for tramps, then, again, why destroy his truck? Obviously he's not "the one" with such low standards, you'd think the main character singing would be glad to be rid of the loser and see this as a real positive thing for her. If the guy's into tramps, and she's not one, he's certainly not worth her time.
We Americans don't like thinking much. Not our style, really. Good guys and bad guys, black and white, right and wrong. That's what it's all about. Yeah, our main character is "wrong" to destroy someone else's property, but, she's "right" to get back at the cheating, lying son-of-a-bitch that cheated on her. I can imagine a lot of people saying just that. Revenge, is good. We like revenge. It helps us not feel so powerless in our lives. When someone else does something that hurts us, something we don't like, it's frustrating since we have no power to keep them from doing it. But, we don have the power to strike back, to take revenge. In America, it's a beautiful thing. We like getting even, even if the feelings we have after often leave us hollow.
As an Atheist, I'm amused by the fact that this is a #1 song on the Country charts. Country music fans are often very religious, very Christian folk. America, like it or not, is a very Christian nation. That said, I wonder what Jesus of Nazareth's take on all this would be? I often wonder this, where my religious countrymen and women are concerned. He'd not be happy at cheating guy, I'm sure of that. Cheating is bad. But, I rather doubt that Jesus would be too down for trashing a guy's truck either. Not really a Christian thing to do, I'm thinking.
In America, in the 21st Century, one of the most important values we have is instant satisfaction. We want to be happy, and, we want it now. Doesn't matter if the happiness is temporary, if it is elusive, we want it just the same. Trashing a truck may not solve our scorned woman's problems, and, very well may leave her feeling lousy still in a week's time. But, for now, in the heated afterglow of revenge, she feels good, she feels powerful, she feels as if she's done the right thing. In American, feeling great, if even for just a second, is reason enough to do just about anything, even trash another person's stuff because, really, it's now that matters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)