The Indifference of Good Men

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”
-Edmund Burke

This particular phrase, in it's many incarnations, has stuck with me for many years, and it's one that I've given an exceeding amount of consideration to lately. Simple on the surface, but it's implications are much more far reaching. What exactly are the consequences of indifference? And can one be condemned for being indifferent?

I'm not suggesting that everyone should be required to be a good Samaritan, or that the man who ran when he heard the gunshots should be tried for murder, but in terms of personal relations, I think that yes, there is a degree of responsibility that can be placed on an indifferent party.

In my opinion, the mettle of a person and a relationship is never better tested than in a time of strife. Struggle is inevitable, and when it arrives, our first reaction is to turn to others. Often, this is not presented outwardly, but we are social creatures, and such a reaction is as inevitable as the conflict itself.

This being said, it has been my experience that people will react in one of two ways. They will be as supportive as possible, giving all of themselves that they can in an effort to provide the necessary support out of a sense of human decency. Or, they will react with passive indifference to the situation. The latter, unfortunately, seems more often than not to be the case. This isn't necessarily an intentional thing, but to me, it is a learned behavior among the majority of our current culture. We live in a "me first" society, in which an issue is ignored completely unless it is personally involving, be it on a personal level, or even in terms of societal issues.

What's more tragic is that these same people who would turn a blind eye are usually the first to come searching for support. It is at this point that the good among us seem to suffer the most.

While it's certainly been said countless times before, any relationship requires reciprocation, that is, a mutual trust, understanding, and ultimately, a mutual support at all times. It's unlikely that this notion would ever be denied by anyone, and yet it certainly conflicts with the ideals of Generation Me.

Which leads to yet a greater conflict: the conflict of the good. A good man gives, and asks for nothing in return, but being human, is not unreasonable in his expectations of receiving the mutual support from those he's selflessly served. Ultimately, when it's his turn to face the struggle, those he's helped have returned to their strength, their issues absolved, and due to our new nature, simply turn a blind eye unless the issue at hand directly involves them. And the good man suffers alone.

Does this make the other party evil for their indifference? For allowing evil to triumph in the life of an otherwise good person simply because of their inaction, or their unwillingness to be inconvenienced?

Perhaps not evil, in this instance, but I think it's safe to say a little less in touch with the spirit of humanity. Furthermore, I think it's all circumstantial. We all make mistakes, and can be short sighted. In such simple circumstances, I believe this sort of indifference can be forgiven, and can often lead to a stronger bond being formed, should a lesson be learned. Rarely is this the case, however, and this leads to the greatest question: how should the good man react to this?

Initially, I suppose the appropriate response would be to shake it off, move along, deal on his own, or to find support where he is appreciated.

Unfortunately, we can never truly know someone's intentions. And often, this cycle will not be a mere isolated incident, but instead be oft repeated. And after so much abuse, even the strongest of armor will break, and the good man will suffer as a result of his nature. His blessing of humanity is also his curse, and he's left at an impasse. Does the good man continue to be a good man, knowing that he will inevitably suffer for his positive contribution to society; that he will suffer for being different by being human? Or at this point should he give up, should he take his own well being into account, and no longer burden himself with the troubles of others, rather than suffer any longer for his nature? Should he relegate himself to a guilty conscience, and sacrifice his humanity in order to better live among humans?

If evil were truly to triumph in any way by the indifference of good men, i truly believe that it is in this way. That indifference by the selfish ultimately breeds indifference among the good, and that, with the loss of each good man, the world as a whole suffers.

On Suicide

In 2005, there were 32,627 deaths by suicide, according to the Center for Disease Control.
The problem is that it's such a taboo issue that nobody will even talk about it. As such, anyone with suicidal thoughts feels as though there is something wrong with them, and is highly unlikely to discuss their problems, for fear of being treated as an even greater outcast. Which ultimately allows for them to only grow worse. Likewise, most people don't even think of the issue, since it's so rarely discussed, and as such, it's rare for someone to be able to truly understand. Many people can't even take it seriously, often looking at it as a mild irrationality.
Too many times, people look at it simply as a plea for attention, when really it is a cry for help.
And all too often, the signs are blatantly present, but nobody can see them, as nobody knows how to recognize it.
My belief is that the best solution to this problem is communication and education. Even if it's not a problem you've experienced yourself, you should do the research, learn about the warning signs, and discover ways to help. If anyone you know and care about even seems the least bit out of character, then talk to them. Even if they're not suicidal, every single one of us is human, and we all need a shoulder to lean on sometimes. I truly believe that we have an inherent tendency to forget that even in times when our world feels as it should be, times aren't always perfect for those around us. It's important to remember that.
Suicide is not a pleasant topic, but it's a tragic part of the world we live in. With a little effort, I believe it can be curbed, however. It really doesn't take all that much to save a life.

Here are some sites that offer a lot of great resources for education and prevention, as well as some helpful topics for those who are feeling suicidal. If you are reading this, please take a few moments to read through them. It could make a difference.

SAVE:
http://www.save.org


National Suicide Prevention Lifeline:
http://www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org/

American Foundation for Suicide Prevention:
http://www.afsp.org

National Institute of Mental Health:
http://http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/suicide-prevention/index.shtml

Yellow Ribbon:
http://http://www.yellowribbon.org/

Take a Bite of the Apple, and Pass It Along

Since I began studying the great philosophers, in particular Neitzsche, I've found myself considering at even greater length the paradoxical nature of the Christian religion. This thought process has only been exacerbated by a number of personal experiences. Somewhere along the line, I came to a realization of my own accord in terms of the specifics that really illustrates many of Neitzsche's points, and that is the most fundamental and most often repeated story in the Bible: the story of Adam, Eve, and the apple.
We all know how it goes. Eve was tempted, ate the apple, and tricked Adam into eating it, thus condemning him to the same life of damnation she earned herself (in true female fashion, am I right, guys?). What eats away at me about the whole story is that nobody ever questions why the apple was forbidden. Well, God said not to eat from that one tree, so what more do you need to know? What was that one tree again? Oh yeah, it was the tree of knowledge. Allow me to say that again. It was the tree of FUCKING KNOWLEDGE!!!
All the land in paradise was theirs for the taking, and yet their only rule was that they could not possess knowledge. This, to me, perfectly illustrates the point that education is the truly enemy of religion., and that faith and all it's supposed benefits can come only through ignorance.
You know, I could really go for an apple right about now.

Robert Frost Sucks

Yes, I said it. Robert Frost sucks. I don't care if he's a beloved literary figure. I have always disliked his work. To me, Robert Frost is the Nickelback of classic American literature. What I mean by that is that he's purely formulaic. Nearly all of his poems are at their roots, exactly the same. Talk about nature and the simple life. Trees, birds, water, painting fences and such. Picturesque rural white America in all its picturesque wonder. And yet, if you look into it, the nature means something more. Something deep. Right? I suppose it could be taken that way. Kind of like in Animals when Chad Kroeger says "gear", but he really means "penis." Clever, I suppose, and perhaps that's a bit of a prurient example, but the idea is the same. We got the idea the first couple of times. Do something different! And yet it's this sort of singular methodology of writing that people seem so quick to embrace. Nobody wants change, or differentiation. It's that sort of comfort in the familiar that I feel inhibits true creativity, both in the writer and the audience, and I can't help but think that Robert Frost is one such example of this. Literary laziness, if you will.

On another note, I'm not afraid to admit that the constant positivity kills me. Perhaps it's just because I'm a bitter cynic who cut his poetic teeth at an early age on Poe, but it all seems so contrived. Yes, even I can see the beauty in nature at times. I enjoy woodland scenery, long walks on the beach at sunset and all, but there is so much more to life than that. It's not all dewdrops on roses and whiskers on kittens. The world that Frost attempts to paint seems almost too idealized to even be believable. And in doing so, I feel that he causes the reader to get lost in a world of fantasy painted in photorealistic colors. It's great at the time, but by putting too much faith in it, the reader only sets themselves up for a great deal of disappointment once the reality check comes in.

It should also be noted that he spent his life in the city. The only time he actually spent in his beloved rural America was spent failing as a farmer on land that was bought for him by his wealthy grandfather.

Once again I say it: Robert Frost sucks. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go cut down a tree.

The Experiment (Part 1)

It's the saints that we fuck and the stars that fall from pedestals of grace, with their halos of thorns bound fast around gilded plastic faces. We're all just hypocrites and liars, dreaming wide awake on our beds of dead roses. Let the curtain fall on this great tragedy. The endings been written from the start. And slit the wrists of emptiness, because fulfillment is the greatest of all myths. Still, we stand fast on the barren wasteland of civility and reason. Let us say goodbye to all that we thought we believed in.

An Intruduction

I suppose like all things, it's best to begin this with an introduction. That being said, you may call me Johnny. And no, that's not my real name. Those that know me know it, but really, there's nothing in a name anyway. A name is simply a label, an identifying mark, and all to often, the basis of unfair judgment. A person cannot be truly defined by a name alone. On that note, I suppose this is the point where I should try to define myself in greater detail. I could sit here and list trivial information; my hobbies, interests, experiences, etc... But in doing so, I'd just be wasting everyone's time. The idea of definition is one that is completely subjective anyway. What may be great to one person could be completely reprehensible to another, and so on and so forth. As such, I'll simply say this: I eat, I sleep, I breathe, and I bleed. I am a human being, just as you are. Anything beyond that is not for me to determine.