Pygmies Lost in a Maze

[anogete]

I've been reading Kingdom of Fear by Hunter S. Thompson the last two days. I wasn't sure I'd like it after reading a couple pages, but it has turned into one of my favorites. I certainly don't agree with many aspects of his life and behavior, yet I feel some sort of kinship with him. He's very much a libertarian who enjoys bucking the system and messing with the order of things, and I love that. And, for the most part, I heartily agree with him in regards to politics and social issues. While reading last night, a couple passages struck me as very apt for the climate of this country nowadays, even if it was written seven years ago. I think he could see this country falling apart far before anyone else did.

We have seen Weird Times in this country before, but the year 2000 is beginning to look super weird. This time, there really is nobody flying the plane... We are living in dangerously weird times now. Smart people just shrug and admit they're dazed and confused. The only ones left with any confidence at all are the New Dumb. It is the beginning of the end of our world as we knew it. Doom is the operative ethic.

We live in dangerous times. Our armies are powerful, and we spend billions of dollars a year on new prisons, yet our lives are still ruled by fear. We are like pygmies lost in a maze. We are not at War, we are having a nervous breakdown.

Those last two sentences sum up what I think about the upcoming election, the state of this world, and the role of the US in everything. We are like pygmies lost in a maze. We are not at War, we are having a nervous breakdown. And everyone out there screaming about change and holding up the little Obama or Hillary or McCain signs are the New Dumb. I don't think any of them can change anything. Things are going down the tubes fast and all I can think to do is keep my head down and try to avoid getting blown apart in the explosions. Congress is too corrupt to allow a President to change much of anything at all. They'll let him/her make it worse, but certainly not better.

Comments

[myvacuumsucks.livejournal.com]

We certainly have been called the new Rome, and we're trying our best to fit that characterization. A giant military complex, shifting the importance of domestic issues to international security for the pursuit of bureaucratic self-interest (namely oil and soil--for our global foothold--); we have declined as a nation since the Red Scare demolished our perceptions of what it means to be free. Steadily free-falling, almost joyously driving ourselves deep into the mire of personal and governmental debt, deriving a sick sense of justice in our pursuit of worldwide dominance--it almost makes hope a shallow concept, doesn't it?

[i-stareatyou.livejournal.com]

Does he write about his experiences in Panama? I heard he did in that book.

He is interesting as a libertarian - though society had to tolerate him, which is what I think is the case with many libertarians. It's a neat intellectual concept, but in reality we have to be organized or nothing gets done and the inequality that's fundamental biologically we take free reign and people will get trampled.

Rome could be an apt comparison to us. A lot of people suggest that Rome died because of decadent leadership at the end, but essentially (as per the Roman historian I took a class from) it burned itself out on unbridled consumption. Seems like that's where we are - Americans are essentially spending Chinese money (world money is financing our absurd individual debt levels) on "the lifestyle we deserve". Don't think that can last. We won't be king of the castle forever, but for whatever reason, that doesn't frighten me. It's a human theme that winds its way through many tales from scholarly history to scifi/fantasy. For some reason the ancient, massive library in Asimov's Foundation Trilogy pops into mind.

Think the real worry is how the environment pans out in the next hundred years. It's going to be real interesting.

[anogete.livejournal.com]

Libertarians are actually very community-minded folk for the most part. They want to be cooperative; they want to help their neighbors. They just don't want this help to be excessive (to the point of stifling the ability of a person to be self-sufficient, which is what I think our current government has done to many of the lower class), but to be a boost to help someone enough that s/he can help him/herself.

There are actually a couple Free State movements - one in New Hampshire and one in Wyoming. Basically, it is a group of like-minded libertarians who move to a certain state in an attempt to influence the politics and community. I've read quite a bit about the Wyoming branch, and they seem like very nice people. They want to create a community in which people are friendly and prejudice is virtually non-existent. They want everyone to have a fair shot at life - to have a job, a house, property, and the ability to live their lives as they see fit, provided that path does not greatly interfere with the individual rights of other. They want little government interaction and as few laws as possible. They believe that people raised in a cooperative and stable community can lead their lives without the amount of government interference we have today. Smaller government means smaller taxes, which means their citizens will retain more of the money they work for, which should make for happier people. They are not people who are prone to excess (like many people nowadays). Most of them live in modest comfort, no mansions and flashy cars. To me, this is an ideal sort of community. My only reservation is whether it can be done on a larger scale. I have many doubts about that. Our population is far to large and set in its ways to accept something so contradictory to the path we are on. Which is a shame because I think so many people would be happier and more centered if they were able to slow down and stop rampant consumption.