“Remember Neo, if you are not one of us, you are one of them.”
Morpheus here points out that if you are a part of the Matrix, you will fight to protect your own cage.
Thus, he explains what is a sheer difference in which one outside the sleep vacuum, must oppose and consider those inside as enemies, no matter how kind or fair as people they might be:
“That makes them our enemies, Neo.”
Notice how un-moderate and radically un-ambiguous Morpheus is about this.
“It is the world pulled over your eyes,” …the safety you don’t know is a cage.
This is the essence of conservatism, and its more aptly described root: status-quo-ism. – Which is equally left as it is right. That is why moderate ‘leftists’ invariably become the more conservtive version: liberals, and then liberals always become actual conservatives in the end.
It is because the root of the original idea logically leads us back to its original premise, no matter what steps are taken apart from it; unless we take a radical shift away from that source.
In this case, the originating idea is Conservatism, the defining philosophy of the U.S. in its entire history, ruled by Robber Barons to this day.
Left-ism is the exception even with a vast majority in our country, whereas in France for instance, Left-ism is the rule.
Virtually everybody would trade an amount of their freedom for security. At least in the United States.
Not me. Not those who matter.
But most. Vast majority.
Not many people can live on edge or even with the faintest threat to their own safety.
James Dickey said:
“If you’re bored with your life, risk it.”
It is that risk that people on both sides of the political equation avoid at all costs. It is that lack of risk taking in which one winds up playing video games or watching soap TV zonked out for the rest of their lives.
More radical people have conspired to control more moderate people, especially today through video games, which produce little more than extreme hand-eye coordination. (Don’t get me wrong, my dream is to create video games, but more like worlds than games, actually…)
Notice that gamers as games go today–are not the most imaginative of people, and if they are; it is contained within the ‘Con’ world of cosplay, far removed from the political and thus, safe.
Safe from being a threat.
A threat to what?
Yet, it is risk and adventure that pull the greatest essence out of life.
Real risk. Real adventure. Not virtual.
Ayn Rand points out that people curiously have differing reactions to things they would otherwise consider to be exalting without question…
A flaming sunset doesn’t necessarily provoke exaltation in all people.
Yet they’d be the very last to admit to it.
Neither do skyscrapers.
Some people react to the most exalted of things with nothing but boredom. Some people visit New York City and are bored, overwhelmed or scared. Others riveted.
Rand says “The man of self-esteem is not bored by that which is meant to lift and celebrate, and in fact, does just that to the most rational of men.”
I swore on the altar of The Universe, Almighty! – and my Mom’s grave, that I would never consider someone who was either bored or overwhelmed by New York City.
The former, I might mention, is the greater sin to me.
That is what makes me a radical:
I refuse to live a life of safety, security, materials, needs and boredom, and act radically to take risks and accept to live a shorter life and have it be nothing but the life I really wanted.-
It is complacent surrender, not violence or death, that is the biggest loss.
The reaction virtually everyone has had to at least a Big City, has been the best guide to who will stand up and who will not; who is fair weather, and who withstands the tide.
( (Though I think my wife is the only one left. 😉 Not actually, but it is important to be willing to lose everything in the face of a fundamental threat to ones values.)
It is so consistent and reliable in fact, this New York rule; that I made it into a measuring stick for how conservative one will wind up. Both conservatism and liberalism are pretty much the same thing without the bone or carrot the elites bribe us with: our so-called domestic or ‘human-rights.’
Both of which are luxuries by the permission of a good economy, historical coincidences as frivolous and non-existent a notion as Democracy.
And sure enough, every friend I’ve had who hates or is bored, overwhelmed by that city – or equivalent, has wound up doing horrible things.
Yes, horrible. Either to themselves, their kids, or others.
All my good friends from from the area of NOVA-DC, West Virginia and Maryland – my original ‘home’ who nearly across the board, disliked New York City: also wound up staying where they were born. Or making ‘the big move’ (to some rural small town) where they proclaim their values, never to be challenged of course.
Unchallenged values are about as good or as real as fake plastic trees in a just-add-water community.
The two friends who loved New York and yet betrayed most of their values for money and security, even so: at least did move on to another state in a fairly big city, far away.
“People say a good thing never lasts and that it has to fall. Those are the people who did not amount to much at all.”
Madonna loves New York City. She was ‘radical’ enough to suggest we blow up the White House. Oh boy, well I would not call this radicalism, it’s plain stupidity since this would not yield any progress. I point this out to suggest the difference between rational Radicalism and just plain old stupid.
Status-quo-ism is built on the precipice of moderation as its paramount value.
“Moderation” they say “will nudge us toward a more rational future.”
Middle of the road people, love nudges. Not leaps.
They like to combine this with the convenient:
“A more perfect Union.”
Consider that that “more perfect” “Union,” is built on the logic of most people. Most people do not possess a whole lot of intelligence, mind you…
These are all things that were won by moderation, by the way:
- Cheaper coffee beans based on Status-Quo U.S. military interventions in Central America
- National Minimum wage of $7.25 “rationally nudging to $8…”
- Hitler’s 1933 election – won by a moderate 44% majority
- Slavery in the United States well after Europe ‘radically’ abolished it
- The Emancipation Proclamation which Lincoln made law only to appease the rising status-quo in the North
- Champion Moderate: President Bill Clinton’s Library-Free-Internet Bill, which wound up charging for Internet
- Obama’s election which moderates tended to love, only to make the most mass U.S. deportations in all of presidential history, combined
- Obama’s ACA ‘Obamacare’ won by a moderate steady hand only to wind up a gift to the insurance companies
Every ‘advance,’ notice, is really nothing more than an appeasement, and observe that even this ‘compromise’ winds up losing the very premise it was based on, to make “valid and slow advances.”
Observe that it is radicalism the status-quo really opposes, not unfairness.
Trump deports a modicum number of people from 7 countries and there are mass protests. Yet Obama holds the record of mass deportations by far, and yet because he is moderate about his views, he more than gets away with it.
“Hello darkness, my old friend…” – The Sound of Silence.
The end of slavery, yielded indentured servitude.
Indentured servitude, yielded low paying jobs for blacks.
Low paying job’s decline, yielded low-income communities which are now ‘ghettos.’
Low income communities still enslave blacks but yielded waterfalls: the false hope of fame from select black people like Michael Jordan, Obama or Jay-Z.
Observe all of these above things were perpetrated systematically by the U.S. government’s policies, which are a radical, and consistent set of strategies with clear intentions, however invisible.
Evil, yes, but radical, consistent and clear to itself.
Every step of the way moderates proclaim great things are won by a steady hand.
They couldn’t be more mistaken.
And what then, does this steady hand have to show for itself?
Nothing but empty promises and dwindling policies.
This is all because you cannot oppose a philosophy, which is defined by a well intentioned and radical set of actions by slight and hence blind, arbitrary course corrections.
Nor can you oppose moral tenets, (which by nature are radical and consistent)–good or evil, by letting the foot in the door to aggression, simply to squeeze out a drivel or echo of an echo of what you really wanted.
Real compromise is NOT an appeasement; It is – NOT – a choice between food and poison.
Who wins in such a contest?
“In a choice between food and poison, it is poison that always wins.”
Actual rational compromise is based on mutual concessions: a concession from both sides in which both gain something by giving up non-fundamental things that are worth losing, equally.
The above list which could go on for volumes, is created by those who perpetuate the status-quo.
The next time you encounter that steady hand of someone with a curious smile and gentle demeanor: question it with nothing but fairness; which must act radically at times, to merely sustain itself. Then will you see how fair that person really is in times that need fighting for.
The “quo” is maintained by middle of the road, “nudges” and “fine tuned baby steps forward.”
They will tell you.
Appeasers, we must remember, are worse than the aggressors because it is the moderates who let aggressors in the door.
Not the radicals.
Because they are careful, and most of all: afraid.
Radicals are not.
My own Dad, the King of moderation and middle of the road answers, wound up being forced by his conservative wife, to drive a school bus for more than 10 years and for a few more dollars on advanced Parkinson’s rather than declare social security.
He still does and is close to death and/or killing students by accident.
He told us that she would get better, that Diana “intends well” despite not allowing any of his sons over his house, while her family had free reign to visit.
“We’ve got to remember moderation when considering Diana” he would say. Over and over.
And yet, every step of the way, his “moderation” would yield yet another foot in the door to the awful things she would advance.
Shutting him out of her room, the master bedroom, putting his dick in a cabinet under the sink and taking down all his Dylan posters. She began their marriage by shoveling my brother out the door when he was living there, sabotaging his employment, every chance she got. I could only stay there a week before she kicked me out. Never to be invited back even for Christmas.
Meanwhile her entire family, her sons, their kids, her father and mother–all there to celebrate every Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years.
All of which – his – family was absent for.
He would appease with little gifts to make her “soften.”
She did not.
He would grant an arm to her fingernail, every time.
I took radical action in response, finally after years of appeasing him, myself: I called FCPS, his employer to get him off that bus.
This is while enduring a hailstorm from every moderate steady hand in my family who railed against me, despite how horribly disastrous it was and how much it hurt him, how dangerous, still nearly killing him.
All these moderate family members reminding me “how much worse I am making things,” and to “just leave well enough alone.”
These are the same voices that said:
“Don’t get too big for your britches.”
“Make your peace with boredom.”
or “Show me a man uncluttered by fearless dreams, and I’ll show you a happy man.”
If you are moderate you are my mortal enemy.
– I decry you! –
Chamberlain said of appeasing Hitler…
“I believe we have achieved peace in our time.”
—Appeasement At Munich. Chamberlain pursued a policy of appeasement leading up to World War II. He felt that appeasing Adolf Hitler today would prevent aggression tomorrow. Chamberlain openly negotiated with Hitler, seeing him as a man with whom he could ‘do business.’ —
It is Radicalism that has won the achievements of man.
It is Radicalism that pushed social security into law. Or lifted the space shuttle to orbit.
Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ was only an appeasement to the radical leftists of the time. Then became the new status-quo.
It is the radical ideas of women and men, Einstein, V. Woolf –scientists and artists alike; people who risked their lives and livelihood to bring us the new standards.
The Greeks knew what self-esteem was at least, and the greatness of man.
Observe that the sparsest ruins of Greece and Rome exalt the spirit and portray man as dynamic, while the best most renovated and restored Medieval churches never tend to gleam, and speak of death and suffering, just to look at them.
I am a Radical. I oppose the Status-Quo.
At all costs.
First, and especially to myself.
“When I’m walking a dark road, I am a man who walks alone.”