Dear Reader, A Word

The following is a story. A tale that could be true - if you're a believer. A parable. A yarn that's not exactly true but real nonetheless. Which is to say -

Dear Reader, A Word

I'm not going to show you something unbelievable to make a believer out of you. I have nothing to prove. Instead, I'm going to tell you something real. Because I have something to say.

*

I observe - People. Events. Actions. Words - and a person who works - Diligently. Faithfully. Well. - fails to achieve what a person who does not work - Diligently. Faithfully. Well. - claims for themself - 

every prize - Won. - like a matador whose sword lunges from their muleta to victory as if to exult - why fight fair?! - when the rules of the fight aren't.

*

The Bull ⋅     It's easy - isn't it - to win a staged fight with a forgone conclusion? 

The President ⋅     That's unfair - a proper festival of feats is an extraordinary exemplar of athleticism - by a bull and a matador. Thus mind you, to disparage a matador is to disparage yourself. Tsk tsk.

The Matador ⋅    Well I agree that the right bull is a fighter, but nobody comes to a bullfight to cheer a cow, no? They come for the triumph of the superior performer against - what is unmistakably - a mere beast.

The Picador ⋅     Would anyone care to hear what I think?

The President, The Matador ⋅    Of course, of course, without a picador there is no spectacle, my friend!

The Picador ⋅     Right. Like one of a hundred sequins on a shiny 'fit, I am both 'indispensable' and invisible as a billable professional.

The President ⋅    No, no, a picador is the first show that beguiles the audience. They are essential - heroically so - But. - 

The Picador ⋅    :eyeroll:

The Matador ⋅    Yes, yes, the right picador sets the mood for a battle of adversaries. It's not the dazzle of a conqueror or the pageantry of a finale, but a first act is very special. 

The President ⋅    - for a splendidly marvelous fiesta, everybody matters - from the carpenters who build magnificent arenas to the hungry who feast on toro de lidia. A bullfight is a dramatic masterpiece; every role is a glorious stroke of brilliant composition. Thus you see, nobody is undervalued or devalued. Tut tut.

The Matador ⋅   Well I agree that nothing is trivial, but top billing is an honor earned in a ring. A picador is a prick but a matador is a killer, no?

The Bull ⋅     I concede that a spectacle is work. But stacking the decks and tipping the scales for an outcome that's calculated to advance neither talent nor merit, to spin a yarn about a 'champion' who 'wins' a canned hunt - that's pretending

there's decency and dignity in a rigged contest.

*

I observe - Officials radiating searing try-hard self-righteousness as they preside. Star performers breathing self-serving self-promotional hot air as they crow. Cogs laboring to be heard above commoditized theater as they spit. - 

while economies of contests, by contests, for contests - pretend not to observe - Officials. Star performers. Cogs. -

every performative triumph of - Justification over what's just. Bullsh!t over who's honest. Noise over what's plain. Pretense over all that's real. -

as if fictions no matter how unbelievable are nevertheless - True. Because. -

everybody is true to their word...

 

Author's Note

We don't believe every narrator... do we?

I mean... the stories we tell!... speak for themselves. Imagine if our testimony had to be honest... if instead of fictions we had to say:

a posture is a performance masquerading as a stand that is neither principled nor scrupulous; a belief is an invention that opines and decides and judges; and a boundary is an ask for respect, that is, to neither trespass nor transgress because trespasses and transgresses are harms.

I mean... to hear the oath-forsworn... what a catastrophe!... neither to guarantee nor safeguard a 'right' to swear false testimony, pshaw.

*

Needless to say... you and I both know... don't we?... a so-called 'right' to violate trust... isn't part and parcel to testifying to something real. As if having something to say... endows a so-called 'right' to be untrue, that is, to our word...

M

Innocence

Every word communicates a lot, but 'innocence' conveys more than most. Let's...

unpack our 'innocence', shall we?

Innocence

Loaded words say... sometimes more than we mean, sometimes less. But 'innocence'... that is more than 'a lot'.

*

From the mouth of the accused of wrongdoing, a plea of 'innocence' says 'I am wronged.' Whether true or untrue, a claim of 'innocence' spits with indignation 'This farce is a violation, an offense, an assault!' Never mind facts or evidence, to affirm one's 'innocence' is to insist 'The rule of law be damned for I am no lawless menace.'

But, of course, many charged with wrongdoing are not innocent; such that many contemn criminal behavior rightfully called.

*

From the mouth of a non-combatant, a cry of 'innocence' says 'I am not your enemy.' Whether true or untrue, an appeal to be spared the ravage of wrath begs 'This conflict against the civilian, the aid volunteer, the loved is not what militaries are for!' Never mind facts or evidence, to protest the destruction of one's people and one's place is to demand 'The rules of war be damned for I am no savage against peace.'

But, of course, there is no seat at the table for dissenters of armed hostility, no? For the campaign of annihilation welcomes not the campaign of diplomatic resolution.

*

In the case of the former, the innocent are harmed by the specious legitimacy of representation. It deceives bystanders and victims alike with a distortion of merit.

In the case of the latter, the innocent are harmed by the brittle assumption of association. So a whole population is condemned by a veneer of justification.

Notwithstanding the alternative:

The accused in the former could be 'innocent' and the combatant in the latter could be 'innocent', right?

*

Sure. As if that's it. The question and the answer of 'innocence'. Never mind the rest of us. The human beings on the other sides of the question.

Who are we?

*

When a defending party is just. When there is no cause to believe such body false or wicked. We who favor such person, do not see ourselves as 'unjust'.

Likewise, when an opposing party is fair. When there is no cause to believe such body wanton or cruel. We who favor such person, do not see ourselves as 'unfair'.

But we also know every body has devoted supporters. Including defending parties that are unjust and opposing parties that are are unfair. These loyalists see themselves as 'innocent'. Whether true or untrue. Never mind facts or evidence.

Because, of course, fealty.

*

I wonder then... don't you? If 'innocence' purports anything at all. Except and insofar as it rationalizes and excuses

who we sympathize; who we believe; who we extend succor and mercy; who we judge worthy of humane dignity.

Because we mean 'we deserve everything' as if the absence of 'innocence' means 'you deserve nothing'. 

Notwithstanding, all who don a halo of false 'innocence' to

plea for the same goodwill for their cries are not crocodile tears; claim the same trust for their appeals are not self-serving fabulations; affirm the same humanity for their protests are not games that cheat to win.

Because we say false 'innocence' is as good as real.

Such that it's not what 'innocence' says or means that is 'a lot'; it is what 'innocence' gets. Honestly or dishonestly. Rightfully or wrongfully. That is everything.

Nota Bene

The examples above are illustrative and not exhaustive.

NB

(i) When, for example, an accused assaults a person on the other side of a line in the sand... isn't the justification for such assault because the 'innocent' party isn't the assaulted? As if 'innocence' is the right to assault a person who is not.

(ii) When, for example, a believer in beliefs attacks a person who disbelieves... isn't the moral defense for such attack because the 'innocent' party isn't the attacked? As if 'innocence' is the right to attack a person demonized.

(iii) When, for example, a testimony is perjury... isn't the legal merit of forswearing an oath because the 'innocent' party is the liar? As if 'innocence' is the right to violate trust. 

(iv) When, for example, a cause promises to empower the aggrieved and an ambition promises to avenge the enraged... isn't the endorsement of such campaign because the 'innocent' party is the candidate who represents basics and @ssholes? As if 'innocence' is the right to say 'I don't care' and mean it. 

etc.

Because stopping at nothing to get everything is how false 'innocence' rolls. 

M

*

Author's Note

Consent of the governed

gained by false 'innocence' as the cornerstone or 'moral imperative' of a raft of laws and actions and policies and judicial opinions that undermine plural democracy is

neither the handiwork nor inalienable endowment of a... 'creator'.

M

You Are

Who are you? The you of your dreams? Or the sum of all...

fears?

You Are

Being challenged means...

Well, what does it mean?

I.

Maybe... 'being challenged' is a bell, clanging to commence a boxing round. Such bell 'primes' us to (a) be on our guard and (b) be on the attack, doesn't it?

Such bell never invites us to seek a solution beyond the ropes and the rules of 'the game'. In other words, such bell never calls us to walk away or to rewrite the rules, to win.

II.

Maybe... 'being challenged' is a goal that demands our time and attention and energy. Such goal 'knows' in its bones: (a) the destination matters and (b) so does the journey.

There's no backing down from or giving up on a goal worth setting or a goal worth fighting for. Never mind the opportunity costs. 

Speaking of our loved ones, our helpmeets, cheer squads, and luggage, there for us.

III.

Maybe... 'being challenged' is: an opportunity; an inspiration; an ambition. No one ever 'makes it' without being:

blind-sided by an opportunity to embrace the left field; pushed by an inspiration to slay an aesthetic; tested by an ambition to mine a 'growth mindset'.

Because an event or a wave or an era is not to be experienced like a passenger on an accelerating runaway train. Life is to be owned.

IV.

Maybe... 'being challenged' is an intractable, raw deal. Whether an albatross of molecular errors or an absence of 'meaning' explains everything or nothing:

Suffering to survive is neither a 'test' nor a 'purpose'. An incomplete or compromised respiratory system, 'functioning' by mechanical and artificial 'lungs', is not an 'untraveled road', courageous in the telling afterwards. A heart living to die is not a handiwork of needlepoint; it is an organ from its first electrical stimulus to its last.

V.

With every challenge that challenges, there's a flippancy, a carelessness that glosses over every granular rubber tire meeting every treacherous road, a positivity that paints every grey cloud, never mind blue sky. 

Challenging a religion, a belief system, a canon, a position of an ecumenical body, is impious and heretical. Censure and exclusion, both in full and in kind, is real and painful. Challenging an institution, a system, an organization, a body is disloyal and disobedient. Denial and refusal, both in full and in kind, is tangible and material.

VI.

I mean... who is not 'being challenged' with raw deals and 'opportunities' and 'goals' and bells, clanging to commence a battle for the ages? But every success and every failure is not 'birthed' with an inalienably possessed intention to incite... rose-colored lenses and words-to-live-by.

In other words... insulated by tinted perspectives and affirmed fabulations, we can live as the sum of all fears. Or we can live as the people of our dreams, hopeful and unafraid because the possible is still...

possible.

Annotation

Do you ever feel like proofing dough, you rise and then... you're sucker punched? Because what makes you - 'desirable' - that is, what makes you - 'to spec' - isn't you, yourself, as you are - but you 'formed' by a hand that is not your own?

As if I, myself, as I am, must be punched down to size; as if I, formed by a hand that is my own, cannot rise as I will it.

Yet... I dream still of all that is possible, of all that may still be. Because if I can live as proofing dough or as the me of my dreams... I choose me.

*

(i) There's a dishonesty to our language and our use of language across our public spaces about what 'being challenged means'. I, II, III are 'versions' of this language and this use of language, hyperbolized for contrast and effect. Notwithstanding, while also directly speaking to actually 'being challenged' (for example, IV).

(ii) Single quotes around words like 'primes' (I), 'knows' (II), 'makes it' (III), etc., are (a) to separate such language from my language; (b) to distinguish distinct use and meaning (for example, above (i)); (b) to reference specific use and meaning (for example, 'untraveled road' (IV)); (c) to quote myself (for example, below (iii)); etc. Note however, this convention is inconsistent (:shrug:).

(iii) 'Both in full and in kind' (V) refers to the many degrees of 'Censure and exclusion' and 'Denial and refusal' that challenges and challengers are subject to. For 'quiet' reprisal and retaliation, are as 'real' and 'material' as 'public' judgment and condemnation. Note also, Annotation, above.

(iv) Speaking of above (i), (ii), (iii): IV, V, VI include language that references, for example, my position per Clarifying a 'Right' to Life (tca). Note also, Annotation, above. Needless to say, this reference is but one of many and beyond the scope of an annotation.

(v) Like above (iv), illustrating the many references of 'rose-colored lenses and words-to-live-by' and 'tinted perspectives and affirmed fabulations' (VI) is beyond the scope of an annotation.

etc.

*

M

I See, I Know

We want to be seen.

We want to be known.

Maybe that is by God.

Maybe that is by the world. 

I See, I Know

I don't think it's a fear of irrelevance. Or that which is deeply important, being invisible. That drives 'main character energy'. Or 'the plot'.

Which is to say, I think why we are and how we are, is -

Let me put it this way:

I think this is the charge we levy. Against those we hold in contempt. Our enemies on that side of the line in the sand. Repellent and loathsome -

Or:

The substance of what we think and what we believe. Speaks more to who we are than who they are -

And before you go there -

No, this isn't humbuggery that amounts to nonsense.

*

Rather to see this, is to know - why we are and how we are -

Not equals -

Not friends -

Not mutually deserving of mutual respect -

But:

Enemies.

*

I am not your enemy. To see me is to know I am not the villain of your story. But still, you insist. You decide. You will it so.

*

You see? What I see? Insisters demanding. Deciders opining. The willing, manifesting main character energy for the plot.

*

Because who we are, is -

Let me put it this way:

I think this is how we live what we believe. As in what we believe we see and what we believe we know. Which is no trifling reality, is it?

Neither irrelevant nor invisible:

This is everything. This is reality for real.

*

So -

What's real - what's material - 

That - is:

You, who insist and demand. You, who decide and opine. You, who will and manifest. Not because God. Not because the world -

You.

*

Such that to see this, is to know. The substance of what we think and what we believe. Drives our main character energy. To breathe oxygen and life into the stories we tell ourselves. For the plot that rejects the truth. For -

Humbuggery.

Postface

What comes after being seen? After being known, what is next for us?

*

Live?

Be loved?

*

Whether we are seen and known by God or we are seen and known by the world, we think and we believe what is next is forgiveness.

An all-embracing kindness and mercy. That neither judges nor blames. Because the story we tell ourselves is this is how we live what we believe, and we are loved because this is how and why and everything.

*

As if a line in the sand that is called religion cannot be a myth. As if the substance of what we think and what we believe cannot be a prison if it is called love.

*

What kind of love -

commands us to prostrate ourselves before a humbug? charges us with disloyalty when we oppose the enthralled to such humbug? names us apostates for testifying to our witness of such humbug's abuse of the truth?

*

Surely not one that's real. Or true. 

M

*

More

In the end, the ostensible existence of all-seeing and all-knowing does not endow not-seeing and not-knowing an inalienable right. To a myth that bludgeons the world with demands and opinions. In service to humbuggery.

M

What It All Means

Maybe it's the gulfstream jet and estate of a prosperity preacher. Or the megawatt bling and lifestyle of a celebrity. Or a small business that rings a bell at the corner of bull and bear because the sky's the limit.

What it all means is in the eye of the beholder.

What It All Means

We want it all, don't we?

The life.

The dream.

Everything.

*

Because who doesn't, right? Milquetoasts, that's who. Too timid and uptight to take what's rightfully theirs. Prey, that's what they are. Too afraid to be wolves.

Chumps. Laughing stocks. Fools. Too gutless to stand up to bullies. How did we become the cowed?

*

Except... other people's stuff isn't rightfully our stuff, is it? I mean: our property's ours, and theirs is theirs. Because fair's fair.

And... we aren't beasts. I mean: we don't scrabble in packs ruled by fangs and claws. Because living like animals is... inhuman. 

And... what bullies are terrorizing us? Basics who lie and roar and steal? Who strut and growl like one-eyed jacks?

*

Come on.

What is this? The road to having the life? Manifesting the dream? Owning everything?

*

In my day, I've smelled a lot of bullshit. No doubt you have too. This smells like a lie packaged as a promise that has nothing to do with prosperity or fame or pies in the sky.

For this is promise-selling 101. Selling us what we want to hear. Selling us what we want to buy. As for what is really being said? As for what is really being bought?

*

That is everything and that is in the eye of the beholder.

So one poll will report that 'it' is financial realities. A study will conclude that 'it' is culture wars. A panel of pundits will opine that 'it' is religious beliefs.

Surprise, surprise, not:

none of this is it.

*

Many of us don't want the life or the dream or everything. Many of us want the fiction.

That that is 'rightfully ours'. That 'bullies' are to blame for 'standing in our way'. That what's 'fair' is nuclear war. That what's 'honest' is naked criminality.

Because the fiction makes the rules. Including immunity from the rules for us and ours. Until the fiction makes the lie the truth.

*

Which is to say: 

It can feel like blood and sweat and tears is for chumps and laughing stocks and fools when 'work smarter not harder' is the earworm of the day. It can feel like you won't make it unless you give up and give in. It can feel like the answer to having it all... is a promise.

As if 'the life' that's prosperity preacher sized; 'the dream' that's celebrity sized; and 'everything' that's the sky's the limit sized... is one monetary gift, one viral plot, and one hustle away. Because that's the promise, no?

I mean: really... That is a myth and everybody knows

only a sucker prospects for gold in a steaming pile of bullshit.

 

Epilogue

About bullies and basics.

Bullies and basics have bones to pick;

their grievances are epic;

and they're flooding the conversation as if they're the voices of reason.

*

I know better. You know better. But 'the conversation' evangelizes otherwise. It spotlights every bone, every grievance, as if this is what it's all about and this is what it all means.

*

This is how bullies and basics make narrative currency. To draw lanes. To move goal posts. To write the story they tell themselves.

So polls and studies and pundits, report and conclude and opine, such story: real and relevant and wholly believable.

Because the fiction makes the lie the truth. Including a myth packaged as a line that the villain is the victim who's saving us all... from villains.

M

Stand in My Way

The line in the sand isn't real. At least, not in the materially tangible sense. However, every person who's ever lived has felt such line, as hot and metallic as the blood pulsing in their veins.

Stand in My Way

You know the line in the sand -

it's very real, isn't it - ?

*

Maybe, like The Big Sick, it respects the sacrifices of paved paths by adhering to dictates. Or, like Mirai, it's the color of a pair of pants in a moment in time.

Maybe, like The Fabelmans, it dismisses the suffering of others under a veneer of casual ignorance. Or, like Marry Me, it's pretending.

*

There's a lazy embrace of lines in the sand like choosing heroism a la Black Panther: Wakanda Forever or ruthlessness a la Taken, that defines the line in the sand as if there's -

A pride. In a line. In the sand.

*

But in reality, the line is, well -

a story we tell ourselves about where we stand.

*

According to some, a conversation about lines in the sand can't ignore the role of silos and anonymity. Which is to say, some lines in the sand aren't lines, so much as -

Packs. Packs that value unreserved loyalty, above rationality. Or organized attacks, above compromise. Or the like.

Such that the merit of any such conversation, hinges on addressing silos and anonymity.

*

But in reality, pack behavior is, well -

a story we tell ourselves about who we stand by.

*

According to some, lines in the sand are virtue signals, favored by the indoctrinated. To be mocked as self-promoting piss and vinegar and -

Corrupt. Because assailing what's indecent is what's decent. If not denouncing what's false as weak and predatory and so much worse.

*

But in reality, why we react, is -

a story we tell ourselves about why we stand.

*

Maybe, the line in the sand isn't -

A line. In the sand.

Because a duck-walking, duck-talking, duck-acting not-duck -

isn't a duck.

Maybe, where we stand and who we stand by and why, is-

A story. We tell ourselves. To stand in the way. Of believing differently. Or expressing differently. Or aspiring differently.

Because standing in the way not being real -

is every person who's ever died on a hill for nothing but a line.

More

In the end, the stories we tell ourselves, are our reality. As narrators, we proclaim such stories, our 'truth'. The bedrock and spine of who we are.

As if

the blood in our veins - and

the line in the sand - and

our stand - and

the hill we die on - are not

fixed in place by our invention and imagination.

*

In the end, we can author a courageous reality that -

Believes differently. Expresses differently. Aspires differently. 

Or we can tell ourselves myths about our powerlessness to rewrite the stories we tell ourselves. 

M

*

Note

To the extent that the stories we tell ourselves inform our lines in the sand and our lines in the sand inform the stories we tell, the following are... movies: The Big Sick (2017), Mirai (2018), The Fabelmans (2022), Marry Me (2022), Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (2022), and Taken (2008).

M

I Respect Your...

Preface

I am supposed to tell you: What to do. What to think. What to say. What to believe.

You are supposed to: do and think and say and believe. Not according to your freedom to be. But according to your faith without qualification.

*

At least, if I am your... God.

Otherwise, I am supposed to tell you: nothing.

You are supposed to: everything.

At least, if I respect your... right. 

*

But that's not true, is it? Not really.

I Respect Your...

I respect your...

right to the truth so:

that is not how it works and you know it.

*

After all... you won't leave me be. What to do. What to think. What to say. What to believe. You're full of it: full of telling me everything.

What's happened to my everything? Or is my right to everything, like respect:

a one way street where you make a mockery of mutuality like you own all the lanes?

*

I respect your...

right to respect:

that's how it works and you not only know it, you pear-shape it.

*

Without me affording you the benefit of civility, you couldn't: Attack what I do. Ridicule what I think. Dismiss what I say. Vilify what I believe. You're full of it: full of doing everything but being real.

Because passing around a hat to fund indulgences isn't being rich. Because gaslighting real lives of real people isn't being powerful. Because pumping nightmares on steroids isn't being influential.

*

I respect your...

right to believe that:

I am supposed to say nothing while you do you. 

*

If it weren't for the timid, the people who think and believe 'fairness' means you exercising the practice of wronging with impunity -

if it weren't for the apathetic, the people who think and believe 'liberty' means seeing, saying, and doing nothing here -

if it weren't for the wrong, the people who think and believe 'happiness' means the will of God, that is: destiny, is in the eye of the beholder -

you couldn't do you without qualification. Not really.

* 

I do not respect your...

immunity to consequences and

I am not supposed to worship your pear-shaped make believe, where the timid and apathetic and wrong are supposed to manifest riches and power and influence

over my self-respect.

Whether you lie for happiness - whether you defraud for faith - whether you deceive for your right to wrong -

you're in a lane you don't own:

mine. 

Addendum

People make much ado about 'respect'.

In the context of generational differences - or entitled versus earned - or that which is owed or due because its expression or measure is not enough - etc.

But all such ado - is not always about respect.

*

When 'respect' is unfurled like a flag that incites and provokes rage from the wounded and aggrieved -

the truth is:

that is not respect. Period.

*

And insofar as contempt of respect has been, is, and will be met with disinterest and inaction,

basic b$tches and basic s$gmas have been, are, and will pear-shape respect:

to @sshole without consequences.

*

Such that normative @ssholery and prescriptive @ssholery are not only a reality because basic b$tches and basic s$gmas are @assholes -

but also because people make much ado about not giving a damn. After all, people have been, are, and will surrender to basics playing at being God, because the alternative is giving more f#cks than zero.

*

Needless to say, I am not supposed to see, hear, and say nothing when basics play at being God and I respect neither the basics who are @ssholes nor the people who see, hear, and say nothing while a dumpster fire sucks all the oxygen out of everything.

M

*

Postface

When basics 'win':

You don't win because it's your choice. Because basics aren't in it to win it for you. Nor do you win because you don't care. Because basics never win without the tacit cooperation of people who'd sooner sell their organs for a magic bean or two than invest and engage in civic action.

When basics 'win':

This isn't good people here being good. This isn't God's will. This isn't inevitable. This is:

you playing at being God 

like God's on team @sshole.

M