The Rise of the Anti Hero and the Triumph of Solipsim in a Godless World

This beyond dark imagery is becoming more and more prevalent. Just the imagery associated with some of the movies and television shows--for example, the imagery from American Horror Story--today repulses me. However, the imagery isn't always so repugnant.  From Dexter to Walter White to Tony Soprano to Frank Underwood to Jack Bauer the world is awash in antiheroes who sell sex, death, destruction and moral corruption as easily as...well, as easily as the devil sold the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The antihero rapes, tortures, kills, corrupts, etc. in service of his or her sense of what constitutes “the greater good.,” and not only do we root for them, we love them--some, of course, more than others. With the exception of Dexter because I can't stomach the idea of a "heroic" torturous serial killer-- I've watched them all and as much as I hate to admit it, to this day, I miss Tony Soprano and Walter White.  What that says about me speaks volumes. So I'm preaching to myself (and hopefully to my children if they ever read my blog...I'm certainly not holding my breath) because I'm as easily seduced, if not more so, by  the anti-hero.  As the saying goes: People teach what they need to learn.

In order to define antihero, you must first define hero because anti simply means “against,” or “opposite of.” So, what is a hero? He or she is one whose virtues and good works greatly outdistance those of ordinary good people. To take it a step further, heroes are "souls already purified from all attachment to things worldly, and solidly anchored in the love of God."  To put it very simply, an antihero is a central character or protagonist in a novel, play, movie, TV show, video game, etc, who lacks heroic virtues: temperance, fortitude, prudence, and whose virtues and good works greatly outdistance those of ordinary good people.

“Virtue consists in the following, or imitation, of God [Jesus Christ]. Every virtue, like every other thing, has its type [exemplar] in God. Thus the Divine mind itself is the type of prudence; God using all things to minister to His glory is the type of temperance, by which man subjects his lower appetites to reason; justice is typified by God's application of the eternal law to all His works; Divine immutability is the type of fortitude. And, since it is man's nature to live in society, the four cardinal virtues are social [politicae] virtues, inasmuch as by them man rightly ordains his conduct in daily life. Man, however, must raise himself beyond his natural life unto a life Divine: 'Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect' (Matthew 5:48). It is, therefore, necessary to posit certain virtues midway between the social virtues, which are human, and the exemplary virtues, which are Divine. These intermediate virtues are of two degrees of perfection: the lesser in the soul still struggling upwards from a life of sin to a likeness with God — these are called purifying virtues [virtutes purgatoriae]; the greater in the souls which have already attained to the Divine likeness — these are called virtues of the purified soul [virtutes jam purgati animi]. In the lesser degree, prudence, moved by the contemplation of things Divine, despises all things earthly and directs all the soul's thought unto God alone; temperance relinquishes, as far as nature allows, the things required for bodily wants; fortitude removes the fear of departing this life and facing the life beyond; justice approves of the aforesaid dispositions. In the higher perfection of souls already purified and firmly united with God, prudence knows nothing but what it beholds in God; temperance ignores earthly desires; fortitude knows nothing of passions; justice is bound to the Divine mind by a perpetual compact to do as it does. This degree of perfection belongs to the blessed in heaven or to a few of the most perfect in this life. -- St. Thomas (I-II:61:4)

The rise of the antihero is establishing a new social order completely independent of nature and totally at the service of human will.  Whereas, literary heroes used to be good people who did good things for good reasons, in contemporary literature, antiheroes have begun to outnumber heroes.  However, the anti-hero is getting harder and harder to discern as all moral boundaries are consistently and seductively blurred.  In other words, anti-heroism is a response to modern man's uncertainties about moral code and value judgements as modern anti-heroism captures the sensibility associated with modernism. The reader, spectator empathizes with characters who are immoral.

“The moral inversion of suspense is when the spectator empathizes with characters who are immoral, who are not necessarily presented as morally preferable in the narrative and may thus otherwise have been perceived as unsympathetic, and feels suspense in relation to a situation where it seems unlikely that this character will succeed. Empathizing with the character makes the spectator root for this character wanting him or her to succeed--more traditionally seen -- (The Antihero in American Television by Margrethe Bruun Vaage)

The devil, it turns out, with his disarming mix of charm and wit on the one hand and darkness and terror on the other, rules the day ...All you want to do is join the party, be his friend, sit next to him, make him smile. 

“Through Wisdom is a house built; and by Understanding it is established: [But] by Knowledge shall all the chambers be filled." (Proverbs 24:3-4)

Instilling fear--because when fear dominates our thinking, love is absent--and the transvaluation (reversing the meaning of traditional and accepted values) and inversion of the predominant moral system of the Christian world are the operating principles of modernity and the postmodern ethos, which has successfully seized the moral high ground...not all that hard, considering the levers of power are in their hands to not only  'do what thy wilt,' but to convince us that 'to do what thy wilt is the whole of the law,' that is, unless you step out of line.

Links:

The Rise of the Antihero

Read more...

Vetting the Antichrist.

No, I'm not saying Sarah Palin is the Antichrist. However, speculating on who the Antichrist is, is important work, since the evil one should be rearing his or her ugly head soon. So, I thought I'd post "Vetting the Antichrist" on the first Friday of every month to discuss potential candidates. Thus far, I've suggested George W. Bush and Erik "D. for Darkness" Prince, owner of Blackwater Worldwide.

Sarah Palin is my next choice, given how the shade, diabolical red flatters her so, not to mention, the negligible "vetting" process that took place before selecting her as John McCain's running mate.

The last time I "vetted" the Antichrist, I asked a couple of questions: What is the extent of this person's power and influence or potential magnitude of his evil doings? How conspicuous is the evil doing? Based on these questions, I've come up with some guidelines. Please tell me if I'm misguided as I am no expert on the principal antagonist of Christ.

• The Antichrist can be male or female, any age, race, ethnicity or religion, and can "claim" any sexuality ( because of society's bias, an openly gay Antichrist is highly unlikely).
  
• The Antichrist can belong to any political party and/or originate from anywhere in the world.
• The Antichrist must be charismatic, must have vast influence and refrain from being conspicuously evil (his evil will manifest when he's sure he has conquered the world)
  

Assuming Mr. Obama failed to meet Antichrist criteria, and is not the prince of darkness, let's see if the prince may be a princess.

What do we know about Sarah Palin other than "diabolical red" becomes her?

Well, Ms. Palin is a 44-year old married, Republican female with five children and a soon to be a grandmother. She is very articulate and extremely magnetic (80% approval rating as Governor). She has the world as her stage, thus, the potential to influence billions of people. What else do we know about her?

According to Tom Hamburger, one of the authors of One Party Country:The Republican Plan for Dominance in the 21st Century , and on staff at the LA Times, she relied on the earmark system that she now opposes. As mayor of the small city of Wasilla, Alaska, population approximately 9700, Ms. Palin hired a Washington lobbyist to secure earmarks. As a candidate for governor, she backed the notorious "Bridge to nowhere", later changing her mind, claiming it as wasteful, and then using the funds for other projects, instead.

In a biting speech that epitomized style over substance, Sarah Palin, an Assembly of God church member, said the "difference between her and a pit bull was lipstick." She targeted that inner pit bull toward Obama, mocking his prior position as "community organizer" because after all, a community organizer helps low-income people, in poor urban communities stand up for their rights. Translation: That's not a real job! Those people are worthless!

She has also been described as having a fragile ego, allegedly dismissing people from jobs they've held for a substantial period of time, for offending her.

Is she the Antichrist? From what we know so far, on a scale from one to ten, ten indicating the "Beast" Ms. Palin rates a three.

Beast Ratings:
George W. Bush ******
Erik D. Prince ********
Sarah Palin ***

Read more...

Will the Real Prince of Darkness Please Stand Up?

Erik D. Prince
Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and Erik D. Prince, (D for darkness, perhaps) are all supreme candidates for this diabolical title ... I should probably rename this blog searching for the antichrist.

Dick Cheney, the mastermind behind the privatization of the military bureaucracy, and possibly the puppet master in the Bush Administration, surely makes him a contender for this epithetical title. His efforts resulted in radically transforming the US military and national security infrastructure from the public sector to the private. How is that a bad thing? In a nutshell, he runs the risk of making profit motive the primary impetus behind national security which is potentially very dangerous to any nation's security, particularly intelligence.

However, as far as devils go, look at that face above...those eyes...something about this picture reminds me of The Final Conflict. I don't know, maybe it's his resemblance to Sam Neill, the actor who portrayed Damien Thorn, 20 years ago. Then, combine the names Erik D. Prince, son of Edgar D. Prince, with the name of Mr. Prince's company, Blackwater, and the name of the swamp Mr. Prince's company emerged, Great Dismal Swamp, and it sounds more and more like something out of Edgar Allan Poe's imagination. Well, let's see if Mr. Prince qualifies under the standards I've imposed in my last post on the Antichrist - level of insidiousness and and the extent of his power and influence - for the exalted designation of "Antichrist". I guess blogging about the Antichrist only reinforced my insanity...oh well.

As far as the insidious factor, or how far this man will go to avoid the radar, Mr. Prince lives his life in the shadows. All his executives must sign confidentiality agreements, prohibiting them from talking about Mr. Prince once they leave the company. Reclusive and secretive, Mr. Prince does not like his photo taken and often uses his hands to shield himself from photographers. Is there anything in devil doctrine that precludes photographs from being taken?

The book, "Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army," by Jeremy Scahill, is convinced Mr. Prince is a "neo-crusader", a "Theocon" with a Christian-supremacist agenda. Mr. Prince's idea of Christianity is severely skewed to the point of no return...the polar opposite of what he says he is so dedicated too.

"I saw a lot of things I didn't agree with -- homosexual groups being invited in, the budget agreement, the Clean Air Act, those kinds of bills." -- Erik Prince on his internship in the White House under President George H. W. Bush

Blackwater Worldwide, a privately owned company, has made over $1 billion from its security contracts alone and is only part of Mr. Prince's global business empire. The Prince Group LLC formed Total Intelligence Solutions as its intelligence gathering and analyzing part of the business...in other words, it's the CIA for hire. Graystone Limited (promotional video) is an international company Mr. Prince acquired in 2004, and this company has managed to avoid the radar completely. Aside from the tax benefits of incorporating in the Barbados, Mr. Prince chose that spot to "better position the company for international contracts." It's primarily responsible for marketing its services to foreign governments and as Mr. Prince increasingly, recruits more and more of his foot soldiers from third world countries - "discount soldiers"

"They're going to pay these people a lot less, and they're not going to respect the same type of employee and labor rights that U.S. nationals would require," -- Erica Razook, an Amnesty International lawyer whose work focuses on private-security contractors.

- and aggressively pursues business from foreign governments Greystone has become Prince's primary recruiter of "foreign military muscle".

Isn't that comforting, considering Mr. Prince's involvement in the intelligence industry? Remember, this is all for profit and the oversight of these companies is non-existent. There is nothing to prevent the use of "intelligence" to help a client who may be highly profitable to the Prince Group. I'm sure Mr. Prince's alleged patriotism is easily thwarted for profit.

"I think it's extraordinarily dangerous when a nation begins to outsource its monopoly on the use of force ... in support of its foreign policy or national security objectives. The billions of dollars being doled out to these companies, he says, "makes of them a very powerful interest group within the American body politic and an interest group that is, in fact, armed. And the question will arise at some time: to whom do they owe their loyalty?" -- Joe Wilson, who served as the last US ambassador to Iraq before the 1991 Gulf war

The evidence more than supports Mr. Prince's desire to keep everyone in the dark. When testifying about the 17 Iraqi civilians gunned down by Blackwater operatives in the city of Baghdad, even after it was brought up that "we the people" pay 90% of his salary, he refused to disclose his earnings.

However, just this week, President Bush signed into law, as part of the Defense Supplemental Spending Bill, Representative Murphy’s legislation that includes a provision to increase the transparency of government contracts with private defense firms. It requires companies doing more than $25 million of business with the government to disclose who their top executives are and how much they are paid (subtract 10 points from Mr. Bush's Antichrist score).

So, why not hire private contractors, especially when our military is stretched so thin in various places around the world?

Jeremy Scahill eloquently answers this question and I will do my best to paraphrase. He basically says, when it becomes a necessity to hire an army of people to fight a war, it’s not a reflection of the will of “we the people”. If this were truly a war of national defense, people would willingly sign up, and the government would impose a draft. In this situation, however, imposing a draft would almost certainly put an end to this war as it would surely serve as the fuel needed to fire "we the people" up.

180,000 private contractors are in Iraq right now working for "for profit" war corporations. There are only 150,000 US soldiers. There are 630 corporations on the US government payroll in Iraq. 40% of the money being spent on the occupation in Iraq goes directly to these corporations.

This administration has circumvented the democratic process in order to keep a draft off the table. They have replaced a system of negotiation or international diplomacy or coalition of willing nations with a coalition of corporations. This not only violates democratic principles in the United States, it violates the sovereignty of nations around the world because they are hiring people from countries who are against the war.

On of the gravest matters regarding this issue is that the contractors have not been held to the same standards as the military. They are not held accountable under any system of law whatsoever. 70 soldiers have been court marshaled on murder related charges alone since the beginning of the Iraq war. Not one armed contractor has been prosecuted for any crime under any legal system.

Our soldiers are lucky if they're earning $40,000/year. Their families are at home saving their own money to buy body armor, meanwhile these contractors are making six figures and have much better equipment than our soldiers, manufactured by one of the companies that make up the Prince global empire. In addition, our soldiers often pay the price for the misconduct of the contractors, as they are above the law.

The Bush Administration has no interest in prosecuting contractor crimes in Iraq. It would be bad for business as this occupation couldn't function without the private contractors. The US has banned Iraq from prosecuting contractors in Iraqi courts and President Bush does not recognize international law, not to mention, there are serious question as to whether military or civilian law would apply to these contractors in the US. In fact, the Bush Administration offered the Blackwater contractors involved, "Limited-use" immunity, meaning they were promised they would not be prosecuted for anything they said in interviews with the authorities as long as their statements were true.

Consider this. Blackwater operatives just showed up on the streets of New Orleans after Hurricaine Katrina hit, "wielding M4 assault rifles, pistols strapped to their legs, flak jackets, dressed in all khaki" as one observer described them, with no government contractor authorization at all. Granted, one week later they had a government contract to protect FEMA, however, it's kind of scary to think a military unit like that can transcend the government's authority so easily. Blackwater made $70 million dollars from Katrina, that's $240,000 per day, and they billed US taxpayers $950 per person, per day. With that kind of power and apparent ability to transcend the law, it's hard not to wonder about the possibility that Blackwater could turn its massive firepower and army of mercenaries against US citizens.

It works like this: Blackwater, for example, will win a U.S. government contract; it will then subcontract with itself—that is, with Greystone—to do the job. From there, Greystone looks to its network of international affiliates, firms like Pizarro's Grupo Táctico in Chile or ID Systems in Colombia, which maintain informal relationships with what are known in the trade as "briefcase recruiters"—individuals with connections to the local paramilitary scene. These men find the recruits and funnel them back up the chain until, finally, they are deployed alongside U.S. forces in Iraq. The practice also serves as a convenient firewall, shielding U.S.-based companies from direct liability for the actions of their subcontractors. "If a court is looking at these issues, where the contract is signed is a factor. There is a lot there that would take it out of a U.S. court's control." -- Erica Razook

With the exception of congressman Henry Waxman, Democratic Congressman from California, almost no one in the Congress has done anything to effectively take on these individuals or this company. Although Obama has a very good understanding of what's going on and has even authored legislation to combat the problems outsourcing security causes, he will not sign the Sanders-Schakowsky bill, Stop Outsourcing Security Act, which seeks to ban the use of these companies in U.S. war zones and make all of the diplomatic security agents full-time employees of the U.S. government, meaning an accountability structure would be in place.

At any rate, just as President Bush is anti Christ, Mr. Prince is a Prince of darkness and anti Christ to boot. As for the "Antichrist" or "Prince of Darkness", the search continues, however, I'm leaning toward Mr. Prince right now.

Read more...

Government of the Antichrist, By the Antichrist, For the Antichrist.

Artist: Mr. Fish
No, I haven't lost my mind, however, this thought of the Antichrist, right here, right now, has emerged, so, instead of letting this insanity fester, I'd rather blog it out of my system. In other words, I want to broadcast my insanity, in hopes that the shame (Yes, even though I'm anonymous ...I've told a few people about this blog so that I may very well be standing naked only thinking I'm fully clothed) will allow me to exercise the power of reason once more. I'm just going to throw this line of "reasoning" out there and see if it sticks to something that prohibits this ghastly thought from returning. Here it goes:

Some, including Pope John Paul II say President George W. Bush is the Antichrist.

"...people close to the pope claim that amid these concerns, the pontiff wishes he was younger and in better health to confront the possibility that Bush may represent the person prophesized in Revelations. John Paul II has always believed the world was on the precipice of the final confrontation between Good and Evil as foretold in the New Testament."

Granted, the Pope did not utter the word, Antichrist, nevertheless, he came as close as he could without actually saying the word. Now, why would a smart, educated man like Pope John Paul II call Bush the "Antichrist", when men who appear to be far more evil - Joseph Kony, Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin, etc. - exist and have existed for as long as man has walked the earth?

Sounds a little harsh. After all, President Bush doesn't threaten to put "we the people" through shredders, throw us in torture chambers, cut off the limbs of our children, brothers and sisters. He doesn't force us to bow down in his presence, forbid us to say nasty things about him, starve us to death or anything like that. So, how could the Pope, of all people, even consider President Bush to be the Antichrist?

While there is no question that the aforementioned men and countless others have etched the essence of their evil into existence for all eternity to gasp in horror, two questions come to mind. The first question, what is the extent of this person's power and influence? The potential magnitude of his evil doings? The second question, how conspicuous is the evil doing?

Pervasive evil is never apparent right away. In fact, many of these men charmed themselves into power, but it didn't take long for the people governed by these egregiously evil men to realize how egregiously evil they were. With the exception of Adolf Hitler, in modern history, the command these men had over others was limited to the country or nation they ruled. Their ability or capacity to perform or act effectively did not extend past their own borders for the most part.

In contrast, President Bush's power far exceeds the fifty states he was elected to lead. In addition to spreading his idea of "freedom" and "democracy" across the oil-enriched part of the globe, the President has taken it upon himself to increase the authority of the Executive Branch as much as possible. Although, the President has made some bold statements regarding his authority, he mostly operates under the radar, circumventing laws and expanding presidential power subversively, using signing statements, instead of the veto, for example.

President Bush, unlike other evildoers, wants "we the people", at least "we the people" who matter - those with any type of political clout - to live it up, have a good time, and shop until we drop. Suffering is the last thing he wants "his" people, the ones who matter, to associate with him.

And, that's the way it "appears" to most of us. If anything, President Bush may have made some mistakes, however, he was only doing his best to keep us safe and out of trouble. Maybe Bush is not the bulb with the highest wattage readily perceived by the eye, but the man's heart is in the right place. Right? Well, how about, does it exist in the first place? None of the evidence thus far suggests that President Bush has a heart.

Keep in mind, the worst kind of enemy is the deceitful kind who operates in an inconspicuous or seemingly harmless way, but in actuality, is committing atrocities that appear to be the fault of someone or something else, and all the while, laying the groundwork for that which causes harm, misfortune, and destruction to become infectious and spread sort of like a cancer or disease, without marked symptoms, but ready to become active upon the slightest unavoidable change.

The seeds have been sown, and the harm, misfortune, and destruction have more than started to spread; it's just that it hasn't spread to the people who matter, us. An infinitesimally small part of our population, our soldiers, and their families, have box seats to witness and feel the horror that is taking place under this administration. Fortunately, for President Bush, most of the horror takes place in another world as far as we're concerned...another galaxy.

A much larger part of our population also suffers the effects of this Administration's actions directly, but have no voice...the poor, the "near poor", the uninsured...the segment of the population that "doesn't matter". This part of our population is growing at an alarming rate, however, and those of us who sit back in judgment, saying they brought it upon themselves may have to think twice as they find themselves joining the ranks of the marginalized.

Combine insidious with "all powerful" and the Pope's thinking starts to make a little bit of sense. Going to war with Iraq; overturning habeas corpus; authorizing and encouraging torture; domestic spying; imprisoning over 2500 children, held since 2001 as “enemy combatants”; Katrina; denying American children health care; expanding the gap ever wider between the haves and the have not’s; simultaneously cutting funding for veterans while cutting taxes on our wealthiest citizens; his callous attitude toward capital punishment...even his AIDS plan, President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) is duplicitous.

Consider this quote from President Bush's speech in November of 2001:

"This new enemy seeks to destroy our freedom and impose its views.

What are we doing over in Iraq? Our idea of freedom may not be the same as another nation...what right do we have to destroy their way of life to impose our views of freedom, democracy?

We value life; the terrorists ruthlessly destroy it.

Is sending young "men" and "women", barely out of school, over to fight a war, based on lies and greed, that is certain to either kill them, injure them beyond repair or psychologically damage them, valuing life? Is killing and injuring thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians, including children, valuing life? Is holding the record for executing the most people as Governor valuing life? Is smirking while commenting on ordering a person to death valuing life? Is letting a bunch of people drown just because they don't happen to have the right color skin, and the status and wealth of white suburban America valuing life?

We value education; the terrorists do not believe women should be educated or should have health care, or should leave their homes. We value the right to speak our minds; for the terrorists, free expression can be grounds for execution. We respect people of all faiths and welcome the free practice of religion; our enemy wants to dictate how to think and how to worship even to their fellow Muslims.

I guess No Child Left Behind is an example of the way we value education, education for the sons and daughters of the people who can afford affluent surroundings, that is. Our system of school finance is one of the most unequal among industrialized nations, having major consequences for the educational achievement of students from low-income families and "No Child Left Behind" reinforces that 100%.

This enemy tries to hide behind a peaceful faith. But those who celebrate the murder of innocent men, women, and children have no religion, have no conscience, and have no mercy.We wage a war to save civilization, itself. We did not seek it, but we must fight it -- and we will prevail."

Aha! "Celebrate" is the key word here. President Bush doesn't celebrate the murder of innocence, in public. President Bush just doesn't give a damn. He's completely indifferent.

"Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response. Indifference is not a beginning; it is an end. And, therefore, indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor -- never his victim, whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten. The political prisoner in his cell, the hungry children, the homeless refugees -- not to respond to their plight, not to relieve their solitude by offering them a spark of hope is to exile them from human memory. And in denying their humanity, we betray our own.
[...]
The end of evil and the notion of redemption begins when indifference ends."-- Elie Wiesel

Well, I'm not convinced President Bush is or isn't the Antichrist because I wouldn't know the Antichrist if I tripped over him, however, I understand why Pope John Paul II wondered whether President Bush may indeed be the Antichrist. He may not be the devil or Lucifer or born of a jackel, but he stands for everything Christ condemned and brutally destroys everything Christ epitomized. I'd call that Anti-Christ, wouldn't you?

Read more...