Repost From December 20th: Three Wills to Power: Violence, Wealth, Knowledge

I was reading this post today and thought it relevant enough to repost:  Violence begets violence, a lesson we never seem to learn. 

December 20th. 

Today has been a good day so far. It's five days before Christmas, and in spite of the horrible tragedy of last Friday, the country is moving forward discussing issues that have long needed discussing. I'm still looking for a job, but many people have come forward with ideas and have even gone so far as sending me job applications. I have filled them out. I am still looking however, but as always, I am always expecting my ship to come in, and keep my left eye on the sea. 

Although I've noticed I've lost a couple of friends because of my gun posts, I'm used to that, and as I have mentioned, I've gotten to a point in my life beyond trying to be a people pleaser. I try to speak from my experience and from my heart. I submitted a post in regard to my own feeling towards guns, and was so very stimulated by the response I received back. I tried to quantify my views, and because people did respond, I was able to express myself in diverse ways, that I think made some sense. When I sold my guns, I didn't do so with the intent of feeling liberated when I did, it was just something that happened afterwards. My post was not to state that I think everyone should go out and sell their guns, it was a personal revelation that happened when I did. I had to sell them in Austin, because I was broke and in need of groceries. For years, I realized that the gun beneath my seat created an anxiety that disappeared after it was gone. The saddle rifle that belonged to my Dad was much harder to part with, however, when I sold it, I felt as though I let go of a part of him that created anxiety. Personal experience. I had a friend with children who would not part with his because of a general protection ideology, but at the same time, another friend felt just the opposite, that with guns in the house he feared for a possible accident in regard to his children. This did point out very different points of view that both made logical sense.

Because I come from Utah, and because I was brought up around a culture where guns where the same as shovels, a valuable tool, I keep and value many of those friends and family who know that rural sort of life, and to me, the need for a good 30-30 saddle rifle did and still makes sense to me. As I pointed out, when we rode the mountain or went down below pushing or gathering cattle, there was no thought of gun control. A rifle was essential, and there were no debates about gun control. In the same post, however, I have been in situations where a gun was almost the end of me, and as my mother attested, I was abused and made to play Russian roulette with an abusive step-father. That was as real as it gets. I really don't think that gun control would have done anything to change that particular situation, other than the fact that he had a gun, and quite possibly obtained the gun legally and in a way that I don't expect the laws to change much. And I really don't advocate them to, because this was a situation that stemmed from an abusive alcoholic. Most violent gun murders that occur from domestic violence occur from substance abuse issues, and I don't think either side of the issue would argue this fact.

Being someone who has always tried to look at the optimistic side of my life, as I grow older with the examination of it, the fact remains that guns and violence have always been a part of its fiber. This latest occurrence has allowed my mother and I to discuss this part of her life, (with me in it growing up) in a way that I believe has been healthy and therapeutic. She has been able to express why she made the choices that she made in bringing these violent men into our lives, and honestly? I really do understand it. The wonderful thing is that she and I were able to talk about it, and bring light to it.

For those of you who know my plays, many of them are rife with violence. That was a life that I knew and saw, I wrote what I knew. If there was criticism of this work, it was usually in the guise of critics who did not understand, (or want to understand) that this is a part of many peoples' lives, and to bring it into the theatre and examine it was not something that many wanted to do. However, the actors that were a part of these plays were always cognizant that this was not just something I made up, but there was an authenticity that gave them wonderful parts to play. Blackout Blues, C&W, Blue Baby, The Pig Hunter, Bohemian Cowboy, all plays with guns and violence. In fact, there is no practical reason why I should even be alive, given the circumstances that were often a part of my life. I can tell you, having to pull the trigger with a gun to your head with a bullet somewhere in the chamber is not something that you forget about. Being assaulted in jail and hospitalized  from the brutality of two violent murderers with no one to stop them stays with you…forever. If there is anyone of us who has had a life's experience that might advocate the necessity of always having a gun on my person, I can tell you, it is me, and yet I choose to let that part of my life go because of the violent energy that goes with that kind of protection. I am always struck by the idea of many of the advocates of guns comes from those who would advocate a Christian God, and the very real hypocrisy that comes from gun advocacy, if your beliefs are authentic, why not allow for your God to protect you from all forms of evil, including the loss of your life from a gun? And, yes, I do know all of the arguments that ensue from this question, free will, God helps those who help themselves,etc. My point here is that unless you have real life experience to make your point, or have the intellectual prowess to be logical in your arguments, they so often appear to be hollow.

As I've said before, my Facebook friends' list is very diverse. Although very recently, I did de-friend someone who posted a photo of Nazis pushing dead jewish people into a trench and advocating that these Jewish people could have somehow been saved if there had not been some sort of gun control. These kind of arguments and posts make you look really ignorant, I am sorry to say, because the variables that occurred in this situation have nothing to do with the current condition we are in, or even for those who were killed and experienced unspeakable suffering at the hands of the Third Reich regime. This kind of rhetoric and these photos do nothing to further the discussion, and in fact, makes me a little frightened of the extremity of your view. (If you read this) 

I had another person post that he just purchased his new glock ten millimeter, and felt much more comfortable with this weapon on his person. The only reason I gave this person some respect was knowing that he had recently served in Afghanistan, and although his comments were very aggressive, I at least respected some of his arguments. People who have been to war, and have seen war, I've noticed have two very different points of view on the subject. Either they take a road of a very real understanding of the devastation that a gun can cause and wish to put guns down forever, or else they continue to be at war with the rest of the world, albeit a quieter form of war. The arguments of gun control and the issues it creates in America, (which is the third most violent gun death country in the world), I understand the issues are diverse and complicated. Although I would have to say that I am a pacifist when it comes to war, I also consider myself a very knowledgeable person on the history of war, and there is no question in my mind that WWII was a war that was a very necessary war, no question. Without the American Revolution, we would not be a country. I even understand the need for WWI. The Civil War breaks my heart, but I understand why it had to be fought. War is a condition of mankind, always has been, and I shutter, but believe that although we would love peace and are more progressive in our thinking that we've ever been, my personal thinking is that war will eventually kill us before a comet or the Mayan calendar ever will. War and violence are part of our collective consciousness, and it continues to evolve. The day will come when the weaponry we have will blow up our planet, even though I would love to think otherwise.

I do believe that mental illness is an overwhelming variable in the rash of school and public shootings. I'll save that discourse for another day, but I will say this. There are three main components to the will to power. A will to power is also part of the collective consciousness of mankind. We all have it, whether we want to acknowledge it or not. We would all like to believe that even in our quest for supreme humility, that this is not a will to power, but in fact, it still is, in an altered form. All power can be summarized in three ways. Violence as a means, Wealth as a means, and Knowledge as a means. Whatever power you wish directly or indirectly to obtain, comes under the guise of these three entities. Would it not be wonderful if Knowledge was the ambition of our aspirations to achieve it?  For if we did, violence and the aspiration to wealth would not be so easily or wishfully sought. We would have a much better grasp on how to save ourselves and live a more harmonious life. I've always said this, and believe it more than I ever did, if instead of increasing the defense budget, we doubled the education budget in our system. If we did this, many of the issues we have with violence would begin to subside. Education is the key to many of the issues we face, and the responsibility to ensure that it is available to everyone in our country. In fact, I would go so far as to say, this would be a law I would support in an extreme manner. I'm not talking about propaganda and a brainwashing, I'm talking about the highest degree of education that mankind has achieved thus far. Knowledge is that power component that exists, but should exist sevenfold. As an educator, I can honestly say that I KNOW there have been moments in my teaching career that I made a real difference. Can you imagine if the best and the brightest in every field were getting $100,000.00 per year to impart what they know? If programs were expanded and we became a country who would wage war in the world with our knowledge? Just a thought…

Guest blogger: Gerry Hitt: In the aftermath of the extreme violence in Boston we ask ourselves, what is the purpose of people who do this?/teach a lesson?

Preface:

Although I consider myself fairly left, and a democrat, I had to post this because of the parallels it makes, and the deep consideration that there really is powerful 'right thinking'. I disagree with several points here, but it's writing that does what great writing can do, change a perspective. It would be interesting to hear what you think.

Gerry Hitt's note post:

I am imagining the mindset of the bombers who must have been familiar with what happens when a bomb goes off that kills or injures a number of innocent people.  They undoubtedly thought America needed to realize there were people in the world who resented the relatively peaceful cities of this country as compared to the war torn countries where war has been waged by our country on distant shores.  I can imagine it could be the retaliation for seeking out and killing bin Laden as well as for as many more deaths of Al Quida as could be possible in Afghanistan.  

Or possibly someone with emotional ties to Iraq could have become incensed by all the violence that continues to plague that country.  I think well, what is the mindset in this country that might open the door to such attacks on the innocent in our own country.  The retired President Bush says he still believes in his war on Iraq, even though the consensus finally became that he gravely overextended our country's ability to wage war, both on the Al Quida in Afghanistan and on Saddam Hussein and Irag, another Bush President's arch enemy in the Gulf war.    

I am just reading a book now called "The New Leviathan" by David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin.  The sub-title is 'How the Left-Wing Money Machine...Shapes American Politics...and Threatens America's Future."  Having been a long time reader of a newspaper, Arizona Republic, and perceiving it as moving further and further to the left, these authors' contentions ring a bell with me.  David Horowitz also wrote "Party of Defeat" about the Democratic party voting for the war in Iraq (if reluctantly) and then turning on President Bush with a vengeance as no WMD were found and the war seemed less and less defensible.

I saw a leftist leaning press attack Bush viciously for this, even though they had not fought against this war which I did not believe at the time Bush should have started.  Not because Hussein was not a tyrant, but because he was an aging tiger who had not done serious harm in recent months, and without absolute proof of WMD a preemptive strike on Iraq seemed a case of overkill.  

I am not for violence or war unless the attack is so severe it would be impossible to expect the general populace to respond any other way as was the terrorists' attacks on the twin towers, resulting in so much loss of life as well as these two huge buildings.  At the same time, however, that the leftist leaning Democrat party used the Iraqi War to try to destroy Bush's credibility along with the Republican Party's they were supporting their own violent solution in legalized abortion by saddling the Democratic party with a pro choice platform, bound to alienate registered democrats like me not to vote for my own party's pro choice candidates any more.  The violence of war in Iraq the Democratic party now protested, but drew a blank when the support of legalized abortion was questioned, not only by many in the Republican party's more bible based constituents but by Christians in the democratic party. 

This is when we began to see a suppression of free thinking on the left which the authors, Horowitz and Lakskin, contend in this book "The New Leviathan" was done through big money, very big money, from the billionaires like George Soros, and giant tax exempt foundations we had come to believe were benign, until they began to be controlled more and more by left wing thinkers.  They also accuse the big universities of going left as infiltrated by professors who had a big influence on young students like Barack Obama at Harvard.  

I have been reading columnists across the land for years as printed in the Arizona Republic, New York Times, Boston Globe, and other big newspapers across the land and I contend that these columnists have succumbed to the pressure in order to keep their jobs and influence.  Fame becomes just as necessary to the famous as money to the very rich.  People tend to start supporting anything to keep their names well known and in the public eye.  Which is why they failed to report this troubling move to the left.  They would not even acknowledge it, a good way to become unimportant to that newspaper over night.  In other words, fall into line, or lose your job, as well as big money and fame.  

And that is why in our land today, a big trial is going on in which an abortionist, Gosnell, is accused of murdering many babies after they were born, simply because it was an easier way to do a late term abortion. Gosnell became the go to abortionist for late term abortions in PA just as Dr. Tiller did in Kansas.  Sibelius who is head of Health Services under Obama was the democratic governor of Kansas who supported Dr. Tiller.  She is the helping architect of Obama's health plan, with abortion I presume still being viewed as a woman's right.  

So we can see that democrats have now become very selective about what truths they support, abortion being a violent solution not one of them.  Instead it is a 'woman's right' and that is the way you better view it if you write for a left wing newspaper.  Which so many are now days, with billionaires having thoughtfully brought up such newspapers so they can control what is written in them behind the scenes.  

Yours truly did not make the cut as the subject of a story in the Arizona Republic for these reasons.  They were not going to do a story period on an abortion protestor as active as I am on the Internet.  I do not have fame or a big salary to lose.  I live in poverty and am thought to be therefore harmless.  But I brought the Arizona Republic to its knees, forced to kill a story on me for no good reason because I think and I can't be bought.  Sorry no news here.  We aren't interested.  

I do know this, violence is wrong, bombing innocent people is wrong and so is killing human beings in the first stages of life.