“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”

Last week was very interesting.  In fact, the past few weeks have been very very interesting.  Tragedy has a way of energizing a populace and laying bare our deepest fears and emotions.  Emotions, in all of their natural splendor, have a way of clouding rational action and thought.  Very few of us are capable of sharp, poignant thought and action in the throes of heated emotions. This has been most obvious in our current debate on weapons, weapon ownership and the role of professional defense in our public society.  I have been posting, debating and storing my thoughts and ideas on the matter as I am guilty of a few assumptions:  A)  I believe that I am naturally the most moderate person in any room; B) this moderate nature of mine allows me to see through extremist views from any side of any isle, from any ideological background; C) and finally, that my objective nature allows me to judge everything and everyone entirely cognizant of my own faults, but using my acceptance of them to pursue my mission of objective opinions.  Basically, I will entertain any debate, but you should be on your game, because I know what I am talking about.

This being said, there was a particular disagreement on Piers Morgan between the aforementioned host and pro-conspiracy theorist, and extremist Alex Jones, that had me so swelled with disgust that I decided to take my previously mentioned conversations on the weapon debate and build my newest post.

I appreciate the way Mr. Morgan (Piers Morgan) is attempting to bring to the light these opinions, that until recently, existed only on the internet for the specific purpose of entertaining target audiences.  Generally entertainment is some form of extremism, whether it be comedy, or a play on passions, it is the desire for entertainers to extract our most extreme emotions.  What moves us, moves them…and their bank accounts.  For the record, I could care less about either actor in last weeks play.

I imagine Mr. Shapiro (Breitbart.com) would know a thing or two about being bullied.  He was obviously the kid in school who received such treatment.  Having a smarmy attitude on national television reeks of ego.  Walking around and presenting the entire constitution to someone who, like him or not, understands the constitution, to discuss one amendment is intentionally condescending.

Notwithstanding the fact that the only reason that amendment exists was because the anti-federalists took control of the congress and amended the original constitution to suit their desire for an opposition to a strong centralized government.  Which was a valid concern in the 18th century as a majority of the country was still very much Tory.

However, now in the 21st century, no such danger exists as the “government” is no able bodied mechanism of war and it is a far stretch to believe that our US armed forces would turn weapons against its own citizens.

I mention, as this is the prevailing force behind the defense of an amendment, not that it is some unalienable right, which it isn’t, but that it must be that we shall maintain a properly regimented militia to counter such nefarious acts.  As if.  Those who believe such tyranny exists in the future of this country have more to fear from radical American extremists or regional terrorist groups then an empty government, and a non-religious, non-fanatical armed forces division.

If you believe such tyranny exists, then you have no real hope in the future of this county.  I agree with Piers on one issue.  This is not Left vs. Right.  That’s a marketing tactic to line the pockets of the manufacturers, politicians and trade groups that support one issue or another.  This is an issue of fanatical extremism vs. reasoned debate.  ALL guns should not be banned, just as ALL guns should be protected.  Either end is just as extreme as another, with all parties eventually ending up standing on the graves of these victims allthewhile taking pages directly out of terrorist playbooks.  This discussion right now, may be America’s darkest hour, and not because someone is infringing on your “rights” or others are proliferating violence.  It’s because with little more than suggestion, it shows how weak we are in the light of great tragedy.  Reducing ourselves to the grunts of cavemen if challenged to think outside of our comfort level.

It’s disgusting.

In the 21st century, in the developed world, the propensity for these events to occur is entirely too minimal. As it is with warfare in developed countries, there is far too much to lose (money, capital) than there is to gain from a military coup. What is occurring in Syria is worlds different than anything that could occur here.  There are countervailing forces in the militaries of the world that we just don’t have here. Attachment to religious beliefs being the most prevailing.  What concerns me, more than fearing our government or military, is the fear that a group such as the Westboro Baptist Church, or any other pseudo-religious extremist group obtains arms and engages in acts of terrorism.  I have faith that my police force and my military will act to defend us and suppress such action.

Second to that would be regional and cultural differences, national belief systems and an adherence to particular military codes. Really, the chance of it occurring is very very small. There exists a larger chance that American terrorists will attack you than our military, or our government, and as we all know. that it is very hardly planned for or responded to before great tragedy has already occurred.  This idea that in the heat of it, an un-organized “militia” will have the due diligence to separate and discern the “enemy” in any “skirmish” scares the hell out of me.  More bullets can only equal increased death and damage.  Innocent bystanders do not deserve the probable outcomes that would result from such an action.

This idea that elected politicians would be able to wield such influence does not apply to the United States. As it has been since inception, the American experiment has been and will continue to be more unique than any other location on Earth. A disbelief in the ideals that make it so, is a disbelief in America as it now stands, has stood, or will stand in the future.

I believe that the people of this nation, and those who embody this experiment would not allow actualized tyranny to happen regardless of the circumstances. As it is contained in my previous paragraphs are my reasoning for this, and as it is my goal to expand this discussion and enrich it without demagoguery, I ask that you take a brief look at the message I am expressing. There is far too much pessimism and distrust for a country and its structures that deserve neither.

Advertisements

4 responses to ““Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”

  1. Well written and reasoned. And while I do not agree with everything you said, we would all benefit as a nation and a society if we tried to look at this, and all other issues in a similar light. Our politicians and the systems that have grown to perpetuate them have succeeded in creating a system that could potentially crash by virtue of stubborn partisanism.

    I often wonder if Madison realized how easily a two party system could hijack his notion that multiple interests would force consensus to the overall benefit of everyone by simply limiting the debate to an either/or option, when reality indicates many other possibilities.

    • Well put, and sincerely appreciated. Firstly, thank you for reading and for commenting in an oft-forgotten rational manner. I cannot describe how depressing lack of actual discourse can be.

      I mention that because, as you state, this proliferation of either/or in popular politics, hardly speaks to the grey area that, I feel, a majority of us live in.

      Madison, as I assume all great thinkers do, assumed the best/worst of us all, and as was a popular economic thought of the day (See:Adam Smith) was assured that by grand design aggregate action would assume the greater good. Oh how reality has a way of making the fool of better intentions, no matter how grand the design.

      Either way, it is a young system in the scheme of things, and I am hoping that it will eventually reflect the nature of the universe to contract after full expansion, or retreat from such extremism, which will then have been, in my mind, Madison’s true intention.

  2. It so relieves me to see that segments of this country are willing to look at things rationally instead of allowing the “reptilian” parts of their brain to simply take over. I have always thought that this idea of a tyrannical government taking over is nothing but an extremist’s skewed appraisal of events, so that they may have an excuse to hold on to a false sense of safety which firearms seem to provide. Furthermore, the second amendment is not only NOT to be taken at face value, its context must be taken into account as to the times in which it was written. This is what is so extraordinary about our Constitution, it is a document of such a flexible nature which can be molded to fit our current issues.

  3. Pingback: It Was the Heat of the Moment: Misplaced Weapons Policy and the Monied Interests | The Independent's Party·

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s