.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

2010 - Welcome to the Future!
............Site Feed............ ............Main............ ..........Blogroll Me..........

Monday, February 20, 2006

Remember the Alamo?

I rarely read the blogs of my fellow Scrapplers. I have a limited amount of time. Sorry. However, Possumtrot has a post that spoke to me. It relates to some things that I've wanted to write about for some time.

Most people are relatively peaceful. We all have a capacity for violence, which I believe is far greater than most people are willing to admit. There was an article going around a while back that spoke of "grey" and "pink" and sheep, sheepdogs, and wolves. Sheep lack the capacity for violence; wolves have it; sheepdogs have it, but use it to protect the sheep. I disagree, although I recognised myself as the wolf. Most males have violent fantasies; our genes carry the capacity for bloodthirstiness. When unlocked properly it can be quite fearsome.

The Army's hand-to-hand and bayonet methods attempt to tap into this source of strength. So do many other martial arts. Many also emphasize calm, restraint, and logic in the face of fear. An angry fighter is a bad fighter.

Our society stresses calm and restraint. Violence is bad, we are told. I disagree. The ultimate fighter can tap into this source of strength when necessary, without losing his head. Government must have the tools of force to maintain order.

I do not pretend to any sort of pacifist nature. I refuse to initiate the use of force for personal gain, but when justified, I use it. I enjoy it. Pulverised flesh and bone and the spray of blood? I have never had to escalate a situation to that point, although I have considered it, once for very little reason. My movements are designed to kill or maim, not to restrain.

There is one concept of fighting that uses five different styles in a sort of rock-paper-scissors fashion. One of these is Tiger style, direct and maximum attack force. When properly employed it is the manifestation of this bloodlust.

Reason is what makes man the most dangerous animal. The fight-or-flight response, hopefully culminating in Tiger style, is not sustainable. The combination of rational belief, emotional belief, and instinct is most dangerous. Threatening someone with a baseball bat may unleash the Tiger. Threatening his wife is much more dangerous. Threatening his civilisation, particularly Western civilisation, will result in a 40-year campaign of murder and mayhem. He will poison your children's milk and indoctrinate his own with the vendetta.

That reminds me, I need to finish reading "The Alien Years." The Earth is suddenly invaded, and after a brief struggle it is conquered by purple blobs or somesuch. Over time, most people get used to their new masters. Some carry on a totally futile resistance, which continues for generations.

Those that resist are those for whom ideals are more important than temporary satisfaction. They care more for J.S. Mill's "Higher pleasure" than for "lower pleasure."

Does this stubbornness equate to superior "honor?" The partisans are pursuing their own selfish goal of idealism, just as the collaboraters are pursuing their goal- bread and circuses. It is not just a heroic pose in Battlefield Earth (The book was incredible) and The Scarlet Pimpernel and Mel Gibson movies; it can be seen throughout history. Were the Free French really doing anyone a favor by irritating the Nazis?

Yet, a certain percentage of the population chooses to die fighting rather than surrender.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home