Psychos, Sociopaths and Criminality

This may be the better headline for what I wrote previously - except, there's a different point here.

I mean, it's baffling to me just how much there was that could actually go wrong. Like ... "say what you will" but ... Democracy seems to be pretty sturdy given how much effort had to go into us getting to where we're at today. And yea, sorry. I guess I'm still a little worked up - ... and, I stopped writing about these things for a good reason.
In the aftermath then, as the Addendum is supposed to show, things eventually disintegrate for me as I start chasing all the possible "But uhm actually"s - and the very act of finding these is work, which is then done for me to work out a counter-narrative, just for it to not have been enough.

And at this point we're like ... at a point where that "But uhm actually" is eventually going to sound like a "But uhm, actually, what's wrong about having a Dictator?". And sure I could entertain that question and assume that we've been indoctrinated to kind of not want those - or just try to give a real answer assuming that the person legit wants to know; But right now I think it's really just a waste of time and effort.

"Change my Mind"


Anyhow am I more down with creating a whole new Party - but that's a different story.

But, in a weird way now, this is about "Loving your Enemy" - because, yea, it seems to be something that I'm having a difficult time with.
I like to tell me that it's different. It's different because there isn't really an enemy. There's just ... this psychic damage inducing set of ideas that I mean to confront. I also understand that it's hostile - like, generally evil - and respectively I don't know what to make of people who defend that. What does "Loving my Enemy" even mean in this context?

It's like in that Star Trek TNG Episode where Picard ends up captured by Cardassians and is subjected to Torture. The Cardassian asks Picard how many lights there are, "There are FOUR Lights!", but the Cardassian insists that there are five. It's torture, it's gaslighting, it's EVIL!

So, we say there are four lights - and then they're like: "Stop Triggering Me!" Or "Can't you say that in a normal tone?" "Why always so confrontational?" "Can't we just get along?".
So, what I'm saying is, that there's a more fundamental Conflict that's unfolding here. When it comes to actually Loving my enemy - a.k.a. The individual of this other group that's flat out attacking and harassing us - that's what I try to do by telling them how wrong "I think they are". So, sharing my experiences as a trans person, possibly refering to scientific material and so on and so forth. Sure one might also say that that's different because I'm just generally speaking to everyone - but unless I'm dealing with a specific individual I'm just dealing with the greater whole. The ideas.

I mean - in this more fundamental conflict, the issue is Repentance. Because the enemy, I must assume, is Anti-Christian, trying to convert them would be the way to go. That now is different to how we would approach the "Love your Enemy" plotline just in general. Like, both sides might be blinded into some kind of Eternal War - and the only way to make peace is to reach out and find the human middle-ground. And working towards that, as presented by the Bible, is so important that we should just try not to fall into this cycle of perpetual violence to begin with. And that would also apply to the provocation of it. And I suppose that that would be called "The Path of the Martyr" for a reason.
To say, that there's this ... kind of person that will just use any and all leverage to ... "be Evil" ... - and no amount of self-sacrifice would ever be enough. It'd rather just fuel their resolve.

So, the only real way out of that - in the current day and age - would be some exit strategy. Quit the Conflict, start over - and let the rest fizzle out. Disown Elown and throw him out somewhere above Africa. A Meter or so above. For good measure! Strip down Orange man and let him be Red, White and Blue in Greenland.


But I have to wonder. I struggle with this topic.
Like ... there are bad guys like this and bad guys like that. And the actual point for here is going to be

Normality vs. Abnormality

A thing that's said very commonly is that "Normal" doesn't exist. I mean, it does - as an abstract. So, do work, earn money, sustain a family, survive until retirement and enjoy the rest. But the individual people that fit into that norm is ... they're going to be very different from each other. Some more, others less - so and so, it's not a difficult thing to understand. Now, if you want there to be a normal - so, only white people - all shamed into living this and that way - you're focusing on the wrong things.

And I do think that some people fail to realize the gravity of the situation. Like, literally trying to justify their Evil by the flimsiest of arguments - convinced that they'd make it past "the Great Judge" with that.
A pear painted like an apple is still a pear! And now what?

So, there is a norm - but it's an abstract rooted in appearances. And how often, after some tragedy happened, do we get to hear that the perpetrator seemed like a perfectly normal guy or is considered a very nice person even? Eventually, after some digging, there may be some people that noticed the one or the other red flag - and it may become more and more clear that the person was or is a legit psychopath. And it seems to be the fear from that, that triggers our pattern recognition into sending a warning signal whenever something or someone seems to be "weird" or 'different'. Like, we're convinced we got the Senses - but so the term Sociopath exists to describe a person who understands what we're looking for. Who understands to blend in, "be the normal guy or gal or whatever" - and confronting the possibility that this person isn't what they pretend to be ... I guess it's scary! Because ... "if that person cannot be trusted, who can be?". I mean - if our pattern recognition tells us that this person is OK - we actually have to confront our own pattern recognition. And that's this thing we've build up for all our life. How would one simply ... change it?

It's similar with Narcissists. They want to be this "larger than life" person - and if they're good at pretending, yea - our admiration is like guaranteed. Because we do want to believe that great and competent people do exist. We'd be glad to have such a person in our midst.


And yea - I guess the word or term I'm looking for is something along the lines of "Disciplinary Action". Disciplinary Action - for here - is all about behavior. Not criminality! The crime is irrelevant. Like ... what's the issue with some petty thief or some beat-down, depressed, angry at the world individual that eventually lashes out in violence? We can make it a "them" problem. And yea, we do. Because sure - first of all, everyone is to be made responsible for their own actions. And a phantom bird is tweeting at me: Some people want to deny that. To them I say: Well, it is so because I say it so! The rest will surely follow!

But the point is - the root problem there is a societal one. Throwing some criminal into jail is ... fair. I mean - there isn't much of a controversy around that I assume. But to 'fix' the issue is to fix the problems that keep causing such people to appear. Like, yea, Jesus was cool with David having 'stolen' Bread even from the Tabernacle. Or what it's called in English.


On the other hand there are people that tend to over-reach, over-demand, over-impose. It's like ... their whole modus operandi is entirely based on the idea that everyone else is like ... turning the other cheek and such. If there's a 'social problem' here - it is ... you know, that they don't get what they 'need'. And as good Christians, I'm willing to say, we have to satisfy those needs!

Hmm ... and suddenly: A point.


Like ...

And that's it!

What's left for me to do is to maintain the form and have a few words as after the fact. I suppose that resolves my conflict. In theory at least. It may seem like a joke - but what's the alternative? Sodom and Gomorrah!

And on that note: Sodomy? Really? The thing that the Sodomites did wrong was that they were "gay"? Is that the take there?