The Futility of Heroism

herc

The idea of the Hero is a misunderstood notion occluded with a hidden deception – a power and revenge fantasy that requires one to hope and wait for the arrival of a savior to solve one’s problems. Thus the arrival of a hero implies and reinforces the enslavement and powerlessness of the saved – instead of one requiring to take self-directed action to assist and support one’s self.

Have you noticed Hollywood’s endless dedication to the superhero blockbuster movie over the past 20 years? Time for another Avengers movie. Soon, Star Wars and a Superman – Batman film coming down the pike. It seems the continuous recycling of cinematic renditions of  extraordinary beings is perhaps the safest bet for making a huge profit in the movie industry today, in so much that it has successfully tapped into the mass psychology of the American public, who generally feel more disempowered, alienated  and disconnected from having to exist within a world of constant existential anxiety. The meaning of the superhero offers much cathartic relief, if for a moment.

I voraciously consumed comic book and their stories of superheroes as a child, although as I became older, I found myself more fascinated by the various artists like Neal Adams, Gil Kane and Jim Aparo who drew the comics than being fascinated by the exploits of the superheroes themselves. Being a comic book artist at one time seemed like a fun and interesting way to make a living, so I thought at the time. When the first superhero movies began to appear in major Hollywood blockbuster fashion such as the Superman, Batman and Spider-Man movies of the past 20 years or so, I saw that there existed definite problems in translating the genre into film. The ideas of grown men donning these costumes and using violence against others to solve problems were… it must be said, kinda silly.

However, all people have an ancient, built-in tuner for a good story. Especially if it features a good hero-figure. From Gilgamesh to Krishna to Hercules to Jesus Christ, the tale of the hero always seems to satisfy that emptiness inside us that we desperately want to fill in with the hope that things will turn out okay for us. Or at least that someone, something or somehow or someway – things will work out. The hero is the anthropomorphic stand-in for our hopes and dreams being fulfilled by something that must always exist outside of us. But this embodied figure of hope – as typified as the “hero,” is based on the cruelest of self-delusions, because to give into such a fantasy, one has to abandon the center of power within one’s self. One has to become enslaved to the idea of being saved by a savior.

The Hero can be described as a figure who swoops in unexpectedly armed with the ability to solve another’s problem. Some believe that the Hero is a figure that possesses supernal qualities or gifts that normal people don’t possess. In ancient Greece, ancestral worship may have given rise to the phenomenon of the hero cult. The Athenian legislator Draco (c. 600 BCE) introduced a written code of laws to replace the tradition of oral law to be used in court. Due to the severe and harsh nature of the laws he authored, for instance, the theft of a single head of cabbage could result in death penalty for the thief) the term “draconian” has been passed down to us to describe such unforgiving and extremely punitive legal qualities. However, one of Draco’s strictures was the official establishment of hero-cult worship in Athens. The most important thing about the hero was not so much of how he or she lived, but rather in the hero’s death. Thus ancient hero shrines were erected that were venerated and thought to provide supernatural protection to the local community of worshippers. There is a reason why this fascination of the hero exists: people have no faith within themselves to face life and overcome challenges that confront them.  They would rather wait and hope for deliverance from another.

Not all challenges are created equal, however. Most people in the world believe that all they have to hold onto is a belief and a hope for something better will come along, or that somehow “things will work out” on their own, or someone or some God will deliver them out of their problems. It is certainly understandable. And it is certainly understandable that most people in the world have suffer at such an unbearable level of pain, despair and anxiety that even all hope for something better is driven out of them. But for those who are stable enough to carry on, the lure of the arrival of the hero is an intoxicating delusion that only fuels self-suppression and fantasies of revenge.

This fantasy of revenge is seen very clearly in religious dramas and doctrine. I had a hard time understanding why it was so easy for modern-day African Americans to continue to follow the Christian religion, which according to my sensibilities is the official religion of the legacy of White European slave trade. The answer came to me while reading Flannery O’Connor’s novella Wise Blood, where the protagonist Hazel Motes in public preaching display of defiance in his utter rejection of his traumatic Christian upbringing , repeatedly spits out this scornful declaration: “Jesus is just a trick on niggers.” It is an extremely cultural loaded throwaway line that at first glance sounds like racist nihilism, but reveals the genius of O’Connor’s understanding of the demented religious ethos of the Southern gothic, for within it there exists the key in understanding the religious methodology of one race subjugating another via Christian mind control by instilling a hopeless revenge fantasy of divine proportions, endless versions which I heard repeatedly as a child through endless Sunday sermons –  how “the first will be the last” and how God’s Justice will descend on the evil-doers (code for the White man generally) and reward His faithful followers (and servants). It is telling that despite the precipitous decline of religious affiliation in America (as reported by the latest Pew study), Christianity still enjoys a strong and consistent support among African-Americans. It isn’t surprising. Historically, preaching the Gospel was one of a few occupations African-American men were allowed to have.

In this reading, God is the Ultimate “Hero.” But in order to accept the savior, first you have to accept your suffering, enslavement, powerlessness and repression indefinitely in this life before you can attain cosmic, Heavenly peace in the after-life. You have to die first before you can be redeemed. One must always await the arrival of the Hero (Christians have been waiting in vain for over 2000 years) – which is to say – one must always seek first the Kingdom of Righteousness and Glory in one’s powerlessness,  suppression and death. Jesus is considered a hero because as a God, he sacrificed himself and became a martyr, which is a form of senseless suicide.

Of course, it is difficult to attain the realization that such a self-delusion that can only exist within the deceptions and meaninglessness of one’s imagination – because no real solution to anyone’s problem can be “fixed” by another – and certainly no solution can exist where there is no self-realization, or self-responsibility, or self-honesty, or self-movement, or self-direction or self-acceptance inside one’s self. One has to be an active participant within all that or give in to further enslavement, abuse and deception. 

Can it be that one’s successful triumph over one’s own self-limitations is the only heroic act possible? Attempting to place one’s self in a mental flowery bed that “feels good” or the seeking of “happiness” leads down the path of self-deception, separation and enslavement.

Handle with care anyone who presents themselves to you as a hero. They don’t really want to save you. What they really want is to take you for a ride.

2012/3/31 – 2012 & UGK – Is Enlightenment Possible?

While I don’t agree with everything he said, U.G. Krishnamurti got one thing right. “Enlightenment is a thought-induced experience.”

UGK correctly demonstrates how the very idea of “Enlightenment” is contingent upon accepting the claims of the “Great Sages” without question. This is very important to understand, as the mechanism of so-called enlightenment has only come down to us through the transmission of the traditions laid down by the sages and their proponents. In other words, “Enlightenment,” like the concept of “God” or the “Divine,” is something that one never experiences without first hearing all about it from somebody else. The narrative of “enlightenment” always involves a search for a guru who has experienced it and relates the alleged state to others. If one accepts the narrative of the Buddha, one has to imagine that nobody had ever experienced “enlightenment” before. Yet, the Buddha made it his mission, claimed to achieve it, and then told everyone else about it. But UGK hits the nail on the head when he remarks in this interview that,

“…once one questions the whole idea of enlightenment, or as you put it, the concept of enlightenment,  we are questioning the teachers who have talked about it – and we have invested tremendous faith in them, so the sentiment comes into the picture, and we accept it as the gospel truth.”

According to the stories related by the Buddhists, Buddha actually achieved “enlightenment.” How he managed to convince others that he spoke the truth would be no great feat considering the way most people are willing to believe in any well – told story, the more grandiose the better. This is why religion and spirituality still reigns in a world where any evidence of the divine is completely lacking. When Nietzsche exclaimed in the 19th century that “God is dead,” it seems that he spoke only for himself and the minority of European intelligentsia who defined the role of religion as a control dynamic of the masses.
Nietzsche must’ve hoped that his view would become dominant in an empirical world of logical positivism, but could not have foreseen that the masses would  never be able to give up their sentiment attached to religion, for sentiment, through its power of emotionalism and feeling is believed to be a higher form of knowledge (a “peace that passes understanding”), that ultimately breaks down all common sense and the ability for discernment.

UGK’s contention, which is very close to my own, is that enlightenment, the “soul,” or spirit, are all inventions and projections of consciousness which demands some assurance of survival. When the interviewer asks UGK that he imagines that the body does not survive after death but he hopes that his “ability to experience” (sentience) will continue at some level after death. UGK. asks in return, “Can you experience your body while you are living now?”

Of course, Western philosophy has always taken an interest in the nature of consciousness. When the interviewer brings up the famous maxim of Descartes: “I think, therefore I am,” UKG says that Descartes asked the wrong question and references an old Indian adage:  “If you are not thinking, are you there?”

Clearly, UGK considers that consciousness and its production of analysing its understanding of experience, projections, thoughts, knowledge and emotions (etc.), creates a vicious circle of impediments to any understanding of the meaning of life.  When the interviewer expresses (almost in exasperation), “It sounds like we’re trapped,” UGK offers only that “there is no answer” to getting out of the trap. Enlightenment, or rather, the enlightenment claimed to be in the possession of  so-called spiritual masters throughout human history, has not elevated the whole of humanity one iota or solved a single problem confronting the human race. The enormous catalog of suffering, poverty, war and exploitation has grown larger with each passing century. UGK correctly surmises what enlightenment actually is: an imaginary “solution” within the metaphysics of “hope.” This leads UGK to say that there was no “answer” and “no escape” from the condition of the world, and this was his big miss. He did not see or accept his responsibility to this world or how universal equality is the answer.

It’s a pity, because UGK perhaps could have offered us even more than what he left behind.

2011/06/05 – Thom Darc’s Sadistic Christian Theology “Prefers a World of Suffering”

Thom Darc wants you to suffer. Why?

 Perhaps there is no other Desteni hater that is more fascinating than Thom Darc. What makes Darc particularly interesting is that he is a living example of how twisted and hateful one can become through the acceptance of a belief system that claims to offer understanding and love. The belief system in question is the Christian belief system, under which Darc makes a startling claim that we shall get to later, but makes perfect sense within the “logic” of Christian fundamentalism.

Understand, people like Thom Darc will always claim to offer an unbiased, well-thought-out reasoning for their position. Yet, if you give them enough rope, they will expose themselves to be neither unbiased, well-reasoned or anything other than what Jesus once claimed they truly are; ravenous wolves under sheep’s clothing.

Thom Darc’s video response to a Desteni member proves my assertion. Indeed, it is the reason my assertion can be made with clarity, for it exposes what is the heart of the Christian Delusion that Thom Darc the Wolf, believes in and defends at all cost – for what he is defending is the price he has paid in this self-investment within a belief that he has become. By becoming that which he must defend, Thom Darc is fighting a battle of self-validation. And instead of answering questions with someone that can go after him, Darc believes picking on newbies is a great way test his mettle.

Thus the belief must always be defended because of what is at stake – the belief that what Thom Darc believes in must be “correct.” And yet, Thom Darc is forced into a perilous corner in defense of his beliefs, hopelessly trapping himself within Christian Delusional Thinking that contributes to the awful condition the world is in by accepting, defending and excusing the physical abuse as part of “God’s Plan.” In this, the Christian belief that the status quo  (and everything else existence) is directed by “God.” There is even a saying that reflects this delusion that you can buy as wristband at my local Walgreens which states, “Let Go and Let God.”

So what does Thom Darc have to offer in reality? Basically nothing, but his claims that his beliefs are superior to Desteni. Darc’s personal War Against Desteni only focuses on a few points. Darc rejects the Destonian position that thoughts, feelings and emotions are harmful to the human being, preferring to see them as a ‘valuable resource” for humanity. You know, that “valuable resource” directly responsible for war, poverty, inequality and everything else that makes this human condition so miserable an existence for most humans in this world. This reflects the typical limits of Thom Darc’s flawed system of “logic,” as we shall soon see, and it is why Desteni does not trust anything that is presented from a religious or spiritual position.

In his original “Desteni Fabrications” video, Darc claims that people become interested in Desteni because they see Desteni providing a way to focus their energies in changing a world that looks terrible. Darc indicates that he wanted to respond to my own Desteni AntiHate video response of his Fabrications video, but Darc preferred to respond to another Desteni member, viewed no doubt as “easier pickins,” rather than respond to my question asking why his beloved Christian religious tradition failed to provide an answer to correct the problems of this world. Darc’s refusal to openly and directly respond to my question shows the bankruptcy of his beliefs. He chose not to respond to my question because there is no response that would satisfy him or anyone else. So instead, Darc will turn his focus towards a newer Destoniani in hopes of scoring a few easy points. But that will not do, because I will never let Darc off the hook.

Actually, Thom Darc has no choice but to avoid my question, because I directed it at Christianity’s weakest spot: the void of relevance and moral force that exists at its center, which has replicated into and within the heart of Thom Darc and other Christian fundamentalists, whose faith blinds them to the simple truth – that the creation and direction of Christianity was a project made by men, full of the thoughts, emotions and feelings such as deceit and lust for power that Thom Darc champions as humanity’s “valuable resource.” This valuable resource is that which uses Christian “faith” as a dynamic social control, shepherding people into modes of thinking that blocks out inconvenient truths.

Thom Darc pretends to know, just like other members of the Desteni Cult Haters Cult, pretends to “know” and “understand” what Desteni is all about – without any understanding at all. The best all he can do is provide cover for his self-perpetuated and discredited belief systems by attacking the messengers who disagree with them without prejudice.  They have no choice but to respond like Thom Darc, because they have so heavily invested everything of who they are within those beliefs, regardless if it is Bible-thumpin’ Christianity like Darc’s, the flowerhat metaphysics of “0rdo Aurora Templii,” the anti-conspiracy-investigation-cult-conspiracy of “MUERTOS” or the banal woman-hating ‘freedom of speech” rants made by Tanja Hilton: essentially these are different facets of the same thing – a mental diversion from what really matters in this world, which is bringing about the end of abuse in this world. It isn’t enough that they disregard the evil in the world with their childishly entertaining diversions, they also have to take it upon themselves to act like as arbiters of morality. The irony of that position the Anti Desteni Haters’ Cult scarcely needs mentioning!

To put a finer point on this, I declare that I am devoting the rest of my life on this effort of ending abuse. Thom Darc will spend the rest of his justifying the abuse. Thom Darc has firmly stated where he stands in relation to the problems of a world that suffers. In his video “Re AntiHate Desteni Fabrications, Darc admits his preference:

“… I don’t wish to live in a world of non-suffering. I prefer a world that has suffering and pleasure and hatred and love and peace and war, life and death.”

Let that sink in for a few moments before continuing. Thom Darc’s sadistic preference for you and me is that for all of us to live within his Manichean dualism, is totally in line with the tradition of Christian fundamentalism!

This is the point which Thom Darc has to admit that he defends suffering because he has accepted, without question, his received teaching of what “God” is, and ultimately, “God’s Plan for Humanity” includes suffering, rape, torture, war, every single thing in Creation. Thom Darc has painted himself into a corner with his unconsciously sadistic theology, as it is based on the Christian conception of Deity as the “God of Suffering.” Not a “God” for the sufferers, you see, but as a “God” who doles out punishment and suffering, just like in the case of Job, where “God” punishes and causes Job to suffer for no other reason than to win a celestial bar bet with Satan. Such is the sense of “justice” when it wielded by the Mighty Jehovah.

I repeat: what Thom Darc has stated so boldly as a “Christian” is that he “prefers a world of suffering,” which unwittingly encapsulates fully the essence of religious thought throughout the centuries. Holy Wars, Crusades and jihad are still being waged across the Earth over ostensively religious rationales. And although Thom Darc doesn’t realize it, he also unwittingly provided the correct answer to my question I urged him to answer and that he sought to avoid by turning towards what he considered a lesser adversary – the question being: why has Thom Darc’s Christianity failed to provide for a better humanity for the world? Thom Darc claims that suffering exists because such activity is the most obvious way to praise the “God of Suffering.” Thom Darc’s logic is simple: if suffering exists, it is because of “God’s” will, and that human beings are saddled with emotions and thoughts that contributed to that suffering, well, that’s off-limits to discuss, as well, for according to Thom Darc’s logic, anything that looks like criticism of “God” must always be refuted.

Within such a cosmic sadism which Darc proclaims as his theology, there is no need to create a “Satan” to contend with “God,” for “God” has all the points covered when it comes to “good and evil.” Thom Darc and the sadistic Christianity that he represents, which is, in effect, ALL of Christianity, claims that a world wracked by evil is preferable to one where evil does not exist. This aspect of “God’s” demonic nature that resides at the core of Christianity has been dealt with before in the DesteniProductions You Tube video, Hiding the “Demonic” Behind “God” – and it is very gratifying to have my views validated by such a Christian like Thom Darc. For the demonic is that which must destroy all things, which is the purpose of sadism and torture, to destroy the human form through sinister malevolence. Such is the God of all Theologies that do not seek to stop the evil in this world, but rather leave it to celestial hands to sort out. Personal responsibility to others, as Darc’s putative master, “Jesus” directed, is avoided out of crass selfishness, for one wonders if Thom Darc would hold such views if he led a life of the worst of the sufferers in this world. One wonders if Thom Darc only speaks such shit because of his relative privileged position?

I could go on and on and on, but know that Thom Darc has declared himself to be a part of the problem, and he has shouted to the world where his allegiance resides: firmly in the camp of the Abusers of this World. Has he lost himself forever?  Only time will tell, for there are many mansions in the house of Christian Fabrications. Thom Darc’s Christian Fabrications are not so far removed from a similar Christian delusion exhibited by another false prophet of Christianity, Harold Camping, whose followers went on record bragging about how many people would suffer and die during Camping’s hilarious “prediction” that the world would commence with the Apocalypse on May 21, 2011. When that dream died on May 22, those same followers were “stunned” at the nonevent. Their precious and fervently-believed-mind-possessions could not work out what went wrong. Did the thought arise within their minds that maybe, just maybe, that every word in the Bible isn’t necessarily true? Nope. Instead, their unfortunate minds could only grasp that the “date” was wrong, not the edifice of the delusion. So now they’ve given themselves another opportunity to ravage their delusions on October 21, 2011. Ought to be fun. But in the meantime, remember one thing: that to Thom Darc’s way of thinking, suffering is your duty to “God” Almighty. It is a perverse and twisted line of reasoning, and yet, very easy to see why Christianity has failed to live up to its promise when people like Thom Darc speak in its name.

2010/07/09 – Original Sin and the Irresponsible Chef

Understanding sin and atonement in relation to an omnipotent God is fraught with contradictions and while there has been many theological and philosophical attempts to logically connect the dots, it has never been sufficiently explained in common sense terms, and this relegates this metaphysical theory to childish superstition.

Christian theology attempted to piggy-back its Jewish ancestors in order to give itself a historical legacy of a spiritual progression from a religion based on Law to one based on ‘Faith’, but the joining isn’t seamless. Christianity has however, been able to justify the belief in sin and atonement by the story of Jesus’ crucifixion by successfully connecting it to the patently mythic story of Adam and Eve.

The message of all religion is simply: “There is something wrong with the nature of your being and your physical body that is an affront to existence. You must do this and that in order to become “redeemed.”

The concept of sin has done more damage than the supposed existence of sin could ever do, because it justifies evil acts by saying we were born evil in the first place with no “fault” of our own. Yet we must “Praise God” who can never make a mistake and isn’t held responsible for creating such a miserable, limited and obviously flawed creation.

The common sense of this formulation would be similar to going to a 5 Star restaurant and being served an expensive meal by the best chef in the world but what arrives at your table was a disgusting heap of garbage, and after you complain the chef refuses to take responsibility for the mess. “I’m perfect,” she says. “That meal has to redeem itself and prove that it is worthy of being my creation.”

“But you cooked it!”

“I’m not listening,” screams the chef as she runs back into the kitchen with her hands covering her ears.

A True Creator takes responsibility for what the Creator Creates. This is common sense.

No religion is “true” because there is no religion that can justify the worship of a Creator who cannot take responsibility. The moral force to any claim of righteousness is emptied of meaning on this one point of Divine Irresponsibility. Yet, to the believer, a limited creature must bear full responsibility and infinite punishment for a design which it had no say in is making. This is simply ludicrous.

If one does something “wrong,” then forgive yourself and don’t do it again. Treat others how you would want to be treated. Find ways that would improve the lives of all, because God can’t do anything about changing their experience. The matter of human destiny has always been with human beings. We are responsible to ourselves and to each other. No deity will be able to remove that responsibility.

2009/11/24 – Video Response to Blissweaver Part 2

Desteni Productions
Video Response to BlissWeaver
Part 2
November 18, 2009

Hey! This is part 2! Darryl with Desteni Productions, and this another clip in regards to Cari AKA BlissWeaver, who had a problem with the 2012 ascension prophecy that we made a couple days ago.

Right. Okay, Cari, again, this is not an attack on you. This is not something that insult or humiliate of offend you in any way. I hope not, anyway. This is just a point; some responses to what you’ve said, and they’re directed at the response [made by BlissWeaver to the Desteni 2012 clip], okay? All right.

One thing that you said, is something that I have heard a million times from these people who profess “love” and “life” and “positive” and “beautiful” metaphysical feelings and emotions – is that suffering is “useful” for “learning.” Or, suffering is what people have “chosen” to endure. Or, suffering is vital to “provide lessons.” I do not know why the people who profess “Love,” “Light,” “Higher Consciousness” would have such a callous disregard to other people’s suffering.

You know, the same people who have the Candy Land Metaphysics of “Everybody is One,” “We’re All One,” “We’re all thoughts of God,” “We’re all the same,” “We’re all One Entity, one gestalt of being, one great chain of being,” “We’re all One, we’re all beautiful, bright, radiant things.” But, these same people disregard the suffering as something beneath them. Something that can’t reach them. Something that they have “spiritually evolved” out of. It’s like, “Oh, I’ve made it! God loves me! Oh, you guys will have to stop suffering and come up here with me!” I mean that’s just silly. It’s selfish. It’s silly. And it’s callous. And it’s like these people have both polarities – they the polarity going of callous disregard and “Oh, Love and Light.” And they’re the same thing. I find it disgusting, actually, that whole point of suffering. As the comment you mad, Cari – the comment’s disgusting – that you said: “To think that one can relieve another’s suffering is Ego-Trip.”

So if I can extrapolate that point: Martin Luther King was on an ego-trip. Abraham Lincoln was on an Ego-Trip. Mahatma Gandhi was on an Ego-Trip. Nelson Mandela was on an Ego-Trip. Jesus was on an Ego-Trip. Mother Theresa was on an Ego-Trip. Mother Theresa. Maybe she was. If we’re gonna be on Ego-Trips, we might as well try to alleviate the suffering of others.

As long as we’re going to spit in the faces of people, of beings that tried to alleviate the suffering of others, we might as well call it an Ego-Trip. If we can just spit in their faces or rub what they’ve done or accomplished or what they tried to do in the dirt, as long as we can do that, we should just call it an Ego-Trip. Just to complete the whole point, there, just to put a cap on it.

I think what an Ego-Trip is actually, what I think an Ego-Trip is actually, is professing “Light” and “Love” and “Beauty” and disregarding the “Ugly.” Disregarding the Grotesque, disregarding the Rejected, Disregarding the Dark, Evil Places that can’t find acceptance anywhere – that’s an Ego-Trip, to think that you above or Better than anybody else, Better than people who suffer.

I know you don’t think that. I know you don’t think you’re better than people who suffer. And I know you don’t think that you’re better than people who are concerned about other people’s suffering. But to say, “To think that one can relieve another’s suffering is an Ego-Trip,” I would have to ask you, do you really believe that? I don’t have to wonder that, because you don’t believe it – it’s just a statement, like al the other statements you’ve made. But this statement, you denigrate and sully the accomplishment of people who did actually – got off their butts and did something about it.

Now, take that for what it’s worth. What we are doing as Desteni, are producing people… raising awareness – and these people that we’re producing will stand as the point of common sense. We want our Principles acknowledged; the Principles of Life and the Principles of what is best for all: Equality and Oneness. All these things you’ve read about and seen on the videos. We’re not just going to make videos about – we’re gonna do something about it. And Expect that you will Spit in our faces while we are trying to correct what needs corrected. We don’t care. You know, we’re not gonna take it personally when you spit in our face. We expect a lot of people who like things the way that they are, to have the same reaction. We’re not going to be stopped. And in the end, you’ll thank us. So I think that’s all I have to say.

2008/07/13 – The One True “God.”

 

Theres nothing left wrong with me that money cant cure!
There's nothing left wrong with me that money can't cure!

 

Taking a look at the role money has played in my life. It isn’t a pretty picture to paint.

Here is a poem I wrote when I was twenty-three:

 

“One day soon, I’ll be free of money

And failed relationships.”

 

Boy, how wrong I was about that first one? I’ll never be free from money. It is the “God” of my world, because that’s what the world has chosen to worship. As part of the millions of the Working Poor (read, slaves), I daily trade my time, my body, my heart, my dreams, my talents and my life for green pieces of paper and various metal coins = survival. Truly, a wage slave is still a slave, without property other than objects to convey a sense of worth or value. It is an uneven, unfair exchange. All the Working Poor get is some bullshit from Wal-Mart or Family Dollar stores. We trade our lives to consume objectified bullshit. Worse, we tell our children, “That’s the way it is.” 

Yeah, ain’t that the truth. I hate money, and I hate myself for failing to find a way for me to secure riches. When I see some famous blockheaad who’s wildly successful and famous but can’t stay out of rehab, or is “suffering for their art,” I want to reach for my revolver. But, am I any better? What would I do with more money that I could spend? Sit on it and have a beautiful trophy wife and a house as big as the Bank of America? 

I grew up poor and black in a backward, racist town. I didn’t feel poor until the other kids made fun of my old clothes. I didn’t about that so much. But when I couldn’t play on the football team because I couldn’t get $15 for a uniform, I was crushed and began resenting the power money had for others who could get it. I couldn’t get new clothes, or lunch money or braces. I hated my mother for giving up on herself and us kids. I hated myself for having to live in that apartment where there was little love to take the edge off of things. It’s a surprise to me that I am not MORE bitter than I am.

I am disgusted with myself that I have allowed the concept of money rule my life and define my being. It is distasteful, and I feel a rant coming on. Actually, money defines me with it’s negative space. The thing that isn’t there, the lack thereof. I went down the path of the struggling artist. Well, at least I wasn’t burdened with tortured self-destructiveness. I was a pretty happy-go-lucky guy. I just failed at it and went back into wage-slaving. 

And then there are the people in the world with EVEN LESS. I would look like a King, to these ones. I bought a pair of adidas running shoes before I realized that they were made in China, probably by some six-year-old kid. Or an entire factory of them… The shame.

What I feel about money must be how I feel about myself.

Not a good feeling. At least I got over on the failed relationship part. I’ve been going out with myself for a couple of weeks, and I think that we are going to work things out. lol

 

To be continued.