The THESIS: Death to Cowards. [Part I.]

I.       The Critics.

 

The “Fandom” wiki is an arbitrary classifier when it comes to Heroes and to Villains. Most of my beloved characters are classified as “Villain”:

 

  •  Chuck McGill,
  •  Light Yagami,
  •  Andy Bernard,
  •  Gustavo Fring,
  •  UBOA,
  •  Rossiu, (*Gurren Lagann*)
  •  Tim (from *Braid),
  •  Severus Snape...

Because Devils love to cry, apparently...
Because Devils love to cry, apparently...

And so on and so forth.

 

Yet why? Because they are intelligent, intense, severe, at times vindictive, cynical, elitist, and unwavering in their convictions.

Disregarding all the contradictions, though, it’s obvious that this is **not** a website managed by the sorts of scholars of morality I’ve grown accustomed to. I did not want to think that people were so prone to psychological projection, but it’s there, for all to see: they’d rather let our World persist in hardship and injustice rather than to do the necessary work to set it right. They maybe never had the magnanimity, the courage, nor the caring that would let them follow in the footsteps of a Yagami or Chuck, much less the genius of Tim, the deadly loyalty of Fring, the cold and calculating rationality of Rossiu, nor the chivalry and honour of an Andy. No: instead, they seem to lead the sort of spoiled lives of someone who believes that “doing nothing wrong” and being “harmless” is enough to be a Hero. It is not, and neither is “good nature” or a “playful attitude”. A Hero has to **take* some sort of **action**, even if it must be violent or cunning, so as to advance Society.

Red TiesTM: Because Horns are so 15th Century.

It would be well and good if we could work together to attain this. Yet I’ll tell you, from experience: that time is past. In my two years of managing the Game Design Symposium, I’ve wasted far more time in arguing with cowards, nihilists, apologists, and hypocrites than building a consistent worldview as a Team. Some of these scum would shamelessly forestall a definite conclusion, just so they could ramble, contradict, divert attention, mock, and irritate regardless of whether or not their ramblings made a modicum of sense. (They even criticized me for my formal tone, as if to indicate that I was trying to be clearer when they’d rather I’d been vaguer.) Some discredited morality entirely, while others tried to put their undiscerning, sluggish “sympathy” before the facts. Yet now I understand that we won’t soon be rid of them, for they are everywhere.

Can we be Villains now?

Yet they’re not **everyone.** For all their cynicism, thinly masked behind their flattery and comedy, they won’t convince me either that we all are villains **nor** that all of us are heroes. We must **work** and *fight* to save this World; to vilify the few who try is only to descend into a mire of amoral apathy: the greatest, cruelest sin of all.

 

**[({R.G.)}]**


The THESIS:


PART I: The CRITICS.

PART II: The THERAPISTS.

PART III: The COWARDS.

PART IV: The MOB.

PART V: The ENEMY.


**This Page has been Optimized for Discord.**

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Early Death of Any Future Peace:

  The biggest problem with the issue of abortion seems, at first, to be that no one wants to talk about it *as* a controversial issue. All the major arguments which either “side” reiterates have been around for roughly half a century at least, and we have made no progress in resolving them in the last forty years. This does not stop idealogues from acting like the matter’s settled and that *their* side won, however.   Yet beyond the moderate, “politically correct” and “civil” surface of the issue lies the deeper issue: Hardly anybody wants to talk about abortion *in itself*, and those who advocate for “choice” (and, by extension, for abortion, as it has to be a choice) are those least willing to discuss *the act itself* and whether it is good or evil to commit.   Instead, we hear from advocates for “choice” a slew of beautiful ideals, impassioned speeches, and redundant platitudes: -    the value of one’s bodily autonomy, -    the need for ...
Read more

First Response to Hazmat: Absolutist Ethics.

Image
Yes: I value the opinions of others, insofar as I can vouch for their integrity. Yet that requires that they fervently believe that what they say is true, that they can stand beside it, put it into practice, and uphold it as a sacred principle, as though it were a Higher Power which compelled them. It thus follows that, so long as an opinion is valid, one must validate it not by merely practicing that view within one’s own life, but by holding others to it. One cannot impose morality on anyone, because morality is binding on us all, in equal measure, and one’s only burden is to fathom it, to the extent one can, and to uphold it. That is not an imposition; it’s an obligation, and, without it, we have nothing. You once asked me: “At what point is it an evil to impose one’s views of righteousness on someone else?” I’ll answer with the obvious: at no point, whatsoever, since it is impossible. Where Righteousness is what’s at stake, one can’t “impose on someone else”, as though one posed a...
Read more

Justice for R. Kelly: a Reflection on the State of Eros. (Dedicated to the Lady Jerri.)

  I've been reading, recently, about the life of Robert Kelly, whom you'd recognize from *Space Jam*'s soundtrack, the "Ignition" remix, and his many other hits, such as "Trapped in the Closet". It just breaks my heart to see how he was treated, not just as a child who had to grow up much too fast, but also as an adult, even after having given us such heartfelt, soulful music. I could never reconcile those sweet and sentimental, loving, sometimes mystifying tones with the entire image of a sex offender; he was a Don Juan, but not Don Giovanni.   Clearly, that same mainstream media that made him famous had betrayed him, while the legal system, which was never there for him when he himself most needed and deserved it, in the tenderness of youth, went well beyond its obligations in defence of "children". The hypocrisy is not the part which angers me, as it is so ironic that it's laughable, and that alleviates some of the sadness of this gr...
Read more