Emissaries of Despair

Here's the thing.

A gun is regressive. And belief that guns are essential and offer you recourse to real protection is erroneous.

I will not convince you of this.

A gun is a tool of death and as such stands against hope which I believe is what "progress" (as defined as "betterment") represents.

A common defense: guns don't kill people, people kill people. This is specious of course and has no real meaning as it is simply a reduction that admits of ALL killing tools.

We forgo the particular in this kind of reasoning.

I can easily argue that all guns are tools of death (I believe that is a true fact but I'd entertain dissent); as a consequence I conclude that all guns are detrimental as they have no other attribute. I will not argue that guns are evil as that requires agency. Guns are a tool that creates opportunities to manifest what is detrimental to human being.

I cannot easily or readily argue against all use of violent force or coercion. I do believe there is, if not a "right", at the very least a natural propensity to defend one's life. Fight or flight--either can be a form of defense.

Now, it's about here that folks go off the rails. We begin to create scenarios and situations where tools of death make us safe against others who mean us harm. We then pit tool against tool in order to create a kind of balance of death expectancy.

To me this is only a kind of gamble. Two guns of the like-make and operating efficiency may be equal in their death capacity; but we must still contend with human facing human. There is never a "same" in this equation.

So, we are back to you and I meeting as beings in the world and bringing our perceptions, knowledge and understanding to bear.

But I think the logical extension to matching weapon for weapon is that we have to believe that humans are always in a state of expectancy that amounts to "kill or be killed".

If you ultimately believe that humanity reduces down to that then you cannot readily argue against any action and cannot create any kind of ethic or morality that works against the ultimate belief--otherwise your beliefs are always, at their core, in conflict.

Kill or be killed gives us our degraded state. If this is this is your belief then there absolutely is no exalted state; there is no divine spark inherent in a maker's creation. Unless that spark shines out in order to kill--to be the last man standing.

I don't think most of us want to believe this and yet this is what we enact it daily when we use guns and buy guns and carry guns; We carry our potential destruction. We hold death-expectancy in our hands.

I take a similar view of the organized religions of which I have more than a passing knowledge. It is always kill or be killed, assimilate or die, masked as our God loves you, believe and be saved from eternal damnation ("the unknown" or "undiscovered country").

This kind of thinking comes out of a desire for Power over others...Power is AGAINST everything. Power is Fear of Everything.

There is no hope in Power and there is no hope in its emissaries or their tools.

Fedora Paranoia

Dennis Hartley reviews movies at Hullabaloo on Saturday Nights. This time he's opined on The Adjustment Bureau--the latest adaptation of a Philip K. Dick story (did that guy know how much movies would use him? Likely.)--starring Jason Bourne.

He opens by classifying this as "a post-film noir, contemporary film subgenre that I like to call Guys with Fedoras. A Guys with Fedoras film is usually sub-headed under (although not necessarily restricted to) the sci-fi genre. Think along the lines of Dark City , The Matrix , or A Beautiful Mind. When the Guys with Fedoras show up in those films, you just know that the protagonist’s world is about to be shaken up."

This struck me...fedoras are creepy to me. They are the symbol of the state. Rather, they are the symbol of the gangster state. Have you ever seen one of those movie-newsreels where a busy New York street is shown in something like 40s or 50s and all you see is hats? (Now, showing the same scene, all you'd see is yellow.)

Anonymity, secrecy, implicit danger and harm...the Cold War state; the nuclear bomb state; the surveillance state. I always assumed the authorities who picked up Joseph K wore fedoras.

I'm sure there are any number of books that parse the history and meaning of the HAT--from the practical uses to its role as religious ornament and on to fashion accessory (and how all these "mix" in some odd way to reveal some inherently "human" meaning).

Is there anything comparable for the female? The Fedora is engendered Authority and as such a symbol of a bullying patriarchy.

My favorite fedora movie is Miller's Crossing where the hat is a character in its own right...it just doesn't fit on some guys. It is seen as blessing and curse. It is indicator of salvation and damnation.