Hi Everyone;
Not a lot to share with you today. You have found me eating my morning oatmeal....raisins and cinnamon, of course. I spent most of yesterday curled up with a book, the dog alternately up in my lap or on the floor....and if you think it's easy to read with a 65-lb dog in your lap, try it. It was warm, though.
Some time back I got into this epic by Terry Goodkind called The Sword of Truth series. I love these other world fantasies. It seems like the worse the life the better the hero. Don't we all need a hero? These books range from 350 to 1000 pages, and I'm starting the 6th of the series. So, it's had me enthralled for some time.
In the process of fighting the good fight, protagonist vs. antagonist, good vs. evil, I noticed that there were a whole load of little guys getting trampled. The evil portrayed upon the populace by the bad guy, the search for justice that just seemed to wind up causing multiple collateral damages.....and in the midst of it all is this populace that is most worried about crops, children, etc. The standard simple fare of living.
It made me think. Dictators ruling their people with an iron fist still, for the most part, allow them to live and be people. To a large extent, their lives aren't to the best they could be, but they are alive and living. I'm often wondering if these people, these little people who are stuck in the middle of these political nightmares, would simply prefer to be left alone to make their life as best as they can? Is riding to the rescue the best course? If the world does nothing when faced with tyranny is the populace more victimized or less?
I'm not advocating any sort of pacifism, so much as wondering at the cost of activism. When it all comes to the end, the little guy just wants to put beans on the table and feed/clothe/house/love his family and self. And, perhaps that can be translated to almost any issue: gay marriage is one that calls forth. Advocates can scream and holler, but when it comes to the end, people just want to live, love, and have a family. Where do these power mongers get off deciding other's lives for them? In a land of the "free", why is it even tolerated?
I say, sit down, shut up, and mind your own business. We'd do much better, I think, in the end.
4 comments:
Hello Randy
Your prescription for people to be left alone and be themselves is a good one, but sadly falls down on one major point - most politicians, whether they call themselves democrats or totalitarians, seem to think they know better than you how you should live your life, and, to make matters worse, are often pursuing selfish goals of power, privilege or wealth. To muddy the waters still further, some are motivated, or at least pretend to be, by narrow religious or moralistic agendas, so that anyone who doesn't profess the same beliefs can be portrayed as being 'obviously' a danger to society and oppressed accordingly. Anarchy, in the pure sense of the word, is the only political system that would obviate these problems - people being allowed to do whatever they like, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. A totally unrealistic daydream, though, because the 'Establishment' would never allow it, and many people are not civilised or self-controlled enough to be trusted with it. So we carry on with our dictatorships, elected or otherwise, being told how we should live. Enjoy.
Love & best wishes
Sammy B
Hi Sammy;
I guess I agree, but dang-it. Anyway, it was one of those odd little thoughts I had as I was reading that made me stop and wonder about the little guys in the story...and the little guys in everyone's story.
Trampling just seems political sport, huh?
Thaks for commenting.
-randy
Hey Randy, not to start an argument over if we should have gone to war but....When Iraq was run by Saddam Hussein the country had more prosperity and more freedoms than when the militant Muslim groups took over. There was protection for Christan groups and women under the dictatorship , which disappeared under the religious leaders. The people had constant power, good streets and modern facilities, all of which the war took away.
Maybe it would have been better for everyone if we had let them decide how they wanted to be governed and then achieved "our " freedom when they were ready for it. Or not.
Hugs,
Scottie
Hi Scottie;
Like you, someone stole my crystal ball, but I am a bit more for self direction than this pseudo-colonialism. Some things are necessary, some aren't. Don't know how to call that.
Good observation!
=randy
Post a Comment