--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Curtis posted an insight today, in his wonderful > Hemingwayesque do-it-in-as-few-words-as-possible > style, that still has me reeling from its > profundity. > > It just explains so MUCH, man. > > Think Rush Limbaugh. Think Bill McNeil. Think > Ann Coulter. Think any number of equally angry > leftist shock pundits. Their whole *schtick* > is righteous anger. That's what pumps their > ratings up and keeps them on top. Because > that's what the audience wants to hear. > > So *think* about that. A TV audience whose lives > are so empty that they get off on righteous anger. > Is that sad, or what? > > I really think I might have been onto something > with my quipped-without-thinking-it-through > "righteous anger is the closest they can get > to feeling righteous" one-liner. That may really > be the issue, both for the TV pundits who feed > the need for righteous anger, and for the TV > audiences who feed on it. > > It's real Old Testament stuff, man. That book > was just *full* of righteous anger. And it's > still a Best Seller today. So is the Gita, if > you are flexible enough to look at it that way. > I mean, Krishna is up there trying to convince > Arjuna to go out and waste his relatives by > inspiring his sense of righteous anger. Or his > sense of "duty," which in my book is about the > same thing when it comes to war. :-) > > Righteous anger is a RUSH. It gets yer heart > pumpin' and yer blood rushin' around in yer > veins and yer adrenaline pumpin' and it gets > you HIGH, man. Be HONEST, people! The last > time you lost it to a fit of righteous anger, > didn't it feel GOOD, at the time? Wasn't it > a RUSH? > > Almost as good as the other kinds of rushes > you've experienced in life. Almost. If the > other kind -- like samadhi, or the smile on > someone's face after you help them when you > didn't have to, or just the joy of watching > a sunset -- aren't really happening for you. > > And, like the other kind of rushes, the rush > of righteous anger is addicting. It *shifts > your assemblage point*. It *alters your state > of consciousness*. It *changes your state of > attention*. > > One moment you are bored shitless with your > life, and then you read something or see some- > thing on the News and wham! -- it provokes > that awesome sense of righteous anger in you. > "How could anyone DO this? How could anyone > SAY this? And about ME, or people like me? > I've got to strike back, or everyone will > think I'm a wuss." > > If you strike back, you're a wuss. > > In Buddhist thought, that is. > > In Hindu thought, as expressed so eloquently > by Krishna, you should go out and waste the > people whose words or actions affronted you. > Shoot them full of arrows and leave them to > die in a pool of their own blood. Yeah... > that's the ticket. *That* will sure prove > that we Pandavas have the market on morality > and righteousness and knowing what's what, > won't it? > > Well, will it? > > Or will it just prove that the "righteous" > who go to war out of righteous anger are > just puny-assed little egos who are so out > of touch with their feelings that they mistake > righteous anger for righteousness? > > "This person *deserves* to be flamed, because > he's a liar." > > "This nation *deserves* to be invaded, because > they're saying that they aren't developing nukes, > and they're liars." > > As above, so below. Fairfield Life is a micro- > cosm of the world, working out the angst of the > world. And just as nations declare war on each > other for no better reason than righteous anger, > so do individuals here at Fairfield Life. > > And it goes on and on, no matter who mentions > it and no matter what approach they take to trying > to change things. The recent push to make flaming > a Bad Thing, and punishable by the worst fate that > some of the righteously angry can imagine -- a > week without being able to be righteously angry > in public -- a dismal failure. Nothing has changed, > despite all the well-intentioned wishes and less > well-intentioned posturing. All of them were like > pouring lighter fluid on a fire to put it out. > > The problem, as I see it, is to somehow convey > to the folks who get off on righteous anger that > there are other ways of getting off. You really > don't *have* to sit there at your computer, jerk- > ing your mouse furiously and pounding, pounding, > pounding away at that keyboard to attain a sense > of...uh...release, and fulfillment. > > You could do the same thing by just writing > something positive and uplifting for a change. >
Well said. I declare you the winner of this conversation. :)
