What is the sanction behind the bullet?
Apparently triggers have warrants in reference to 'the criminal' versus 'the protagonist'. What makes murder justifiable by occasion, when the world claims to reason with moral? If it is not, exactly, the death that accounts for misdeed, then ultimately, relative motive permits the sounds of intervention.
But how do you blame subjective intent?
If you murdered my child, and the whole world was at the defense of my reasons to retalliate and deemed them 'good', then so far, I am 'the protagonist'. But if you are the aim of my barrel, and the buckshot missed you and drove in and out the skull of a woman with a carriage in her hands and a bible in her purse, who just so happen to intercept my 'good' bullet; are the heroics that enabled that bullet withdrawn because of the tragedy? Or does the interior motive outweigh the death?
The answer?
The protagonist becomes the villian.
Why?
Because it does not benefit the power you answer to.
The truth?
Sanctioned murder is bullshit.
Subjectivity cannot logically be subjective to an occasion.
It doesn't add up.
It's the worthless concept of a committee of hypocrites who layed the laws to control a mass people. Our laws define murder to be some irrational act of violence and tell you that you admire your freedom, then as a civilian, there is no tolerance and absolutely no excuse for you to bare arms or to influence or perform a move of violence. However, by this same set of regulation, they have the power to draft you to a warzone and appoint you to be an assassin whether you have a motive or not.
Murder is not subjective to moral.
It is controlled and licensed by authority.
Moral is a world with definition but no substance.
People in power beat the concept into your conscience to prevent the system from being overthrown.
The People out-number The Power.
Don't give The People the power.
It will spark another revolution...
A revolution similar to one sparked by Our Fathers.
[the first shot]
No comments:
Post a Comment