|
So Who Do You Pick This Sunday? before/after I don't believe in 'the Devil' anymore. I don't believe in Satan. And I still do believe that the deplorable face of evil amongst humankind is the self-obssessed, unaware and ultimately ignorant. (And while I'm on this metaphysical dirt road through the masses of white trash in hicksville, I shall digress a bit furthur. The notion of 'the Devil' or 'Satan' seems to be a curiously human concoction, something definitely needed to provide the axis to control the masses, through fear and rallying calls. It also provided an easy facilitation to religious war, which should be a contradiction in terms, and a simple boogeyman scapegoat for early man to blame his failings. What is interesting to me is that even in the most casual observation of my kind, humankind, is that its quite easy to see that mankind needs no help in doing evil contemptuous, odious things, and by the creation of such a metaphysical concept, one is able to remove the taint from such activities that one would otherwise normally hold to be in contention with the tenets espoused by the controlling faith. In essence, metaphysically speaking, Christianity dreamed up its boogeyman and made it real.) But if you tied me down, and forced me to make a choice as to who I would suspect to be the Devil walking amongst us, I would have to say Ralph Reed. Sure, there's arguments to be made for genoicidists, the madmen, the cruel pig fuckers who act like animals. But that's all basal animal behavior, which in the traditionalist sense, maybe what this western boogeyman represents, however, this IS the 21st century, and I will drag the self-righteous hate-mongers into the "modern" era kicking and screaming if I have to. Interesting to see that they're not about any sort of change or adaptability. It bothers me that people are so unwilling to think. And really, suppose you are at a dinner party, and all the lieutenants of evil are there, representative of the whole corporation. Who really would be the slickest? Who would dominate the conversation? Who would be recognized as 'the one'? When you really get right down to it, planning an atrocity and acts of animalistic cruelty is pretty simple. Throw moral standards of behavior out, think about it for awhile, and come up with a plan. Just about anyone can do it, and after moral implications are forgotten, its really more about logistics. But when you've got a sly weasel, who can head a large body of supposedly righteous people, use and abuse their support( 'render ceasar unto ceasar, blah blah blah, get a favorable ruling for microsoft, get a sweetheart job from corrupt energy giant Enron), lead them into evils(hatemongering, intolerance, hate crimes, suspected terrorisim, murder of doctors) , and warp their wills and ways to foment the spread of more evil( eric murdoch, and I suspect the Anthrax scare), all the while being touted as one of their greatest, if not the greatest leader ever, then, by gum, you have a bonna-fide home run hitter. These evil fuckers, they're everywhere. The irony is rich. Want to crusade against evil, anyone anywhere, start by opening your eyes and seeing who's in charge.
|
