It seems that over the ages and across the continents there have been many an attempt to silence a woman or man...
Individuals set adrift as paper boats upon an ocean of despair...
Some lost at sea, others steer for islands of obscurity, a few sail on...
For their efforts mourned, mocked, scorned, assuredly obscured...
For what they inconveniently did, said, knew, thought or were.
And so they are pulled astray upon less troublesome paths...
Or are otherwise struck down in circumstances covert or overt.
Many victories are won over little non-conformists...
But far fewer perspectives have been destroyed.
I would explain it myself but the enigmatic 'V' from the movie 'V for Vendetta' puts it poetically as I could not.
"Beneath this mask there is more than flesh..." Yes, because - without spoiling the movie for anybody who hasn't watched the movie, the mask represents a movement - a way of life.
What is less clear about the movers and shakers who motion for the assassination of the inconvenient (persons, movements, and sometimes nations) is whether their prime motive is a disdain forelements of humanity born of a typically inferior perspective, or whether there exists an element of base fear. Well - the writing is on the wall, but I'm not sure that such evidence is conclusive enough.
I suppose that if a person picked up a pea-shooter to mount a resistance then s/he could be seen to be a combatant; and it would be easier to argue self-defense in cutting that deviant down with one's toy assassin drone cruising at 10,000 feet (and lets be frank with ourselves, many deaths by drone closely fits this description). Who needs to negotiate the living surrender of dehumanized peasants with relatives lost to recent wars ... erm... I mean "terrorists"?
But what of the pacifist who's main crime is posing views that don't fit well with one's global ambitions?
One could simply string him or her up for an untimely end. Such would be far from the first time in history.
The person would fall and the ideas posed would either go away for a little while or would come forth with a vengeance within new vessel. And an idea expressed 'will' come back.
Thus, what is the point? It is a hollow gesture of futility - an admission of one's inferiority.
For how can the mettle of one's perspective be tested if not when at loggerheads with another?
Such is how perspectives evolve and grow stronger - not through the suppression of other perspectives but through triumphing over them - without losing sight of the better future that embracing them should bring.
It is harder to embrace a perspective steeped in blood - moreso in the blood of the innocent.
And so I would ask readers to join me in a toast to those among us who act in spite of the underhanded and occasionally lethal resistance that they face. May their souls trascend to the next chapter free of the muddied residues of those who have wronged them. May their perspectives live on and furtheer evolve within the minds of new vessels.
If you found this post interesting and would like to share this with your friends then a resteem couldn't hurt.
If you 'didn't' like this (Maybe you simply believe that the USA's military interventions half way around the planet actually are justified) then feel free to share your views in comments. No promises that we'll end up agreeing but a mature conversation should prove healthy.
Sincerely,
