To the San Antonio City Council, Economic Development Board, and Department of Cultural and Creative Department:
Save our culture. Save our identity. Save our Strip. Continue reading “Petition to City of San Antonio: Save Our Strip”
Watching The Dark Knight Rises, I knew I was really liking it. In the months leading up to it, I had my doubts: I didn’t trust the casting, the plot elements, or the idea that lightning could strike thrice. After watching it, I loved it. It wasn’t just the casting, the plot elements, or that lightning struck thrice. It wasn’t the mind-blowing camera direction or the fantastically tasteful re-imagining of Batman canon. It was something else, something that I caught onto about halfway through the film: the film’s underlying message of true justice, what it is and isn’t.
The series’ backdrop of economic turmoil had seemed no more than topical so far, perhaps a little Illuminati-esque message from the creators. As the third film progressed, a tingling feeling crept into my critical mind that I couldn’t quite pin down. It hit me while I witnessed all-out pandemonium break loose in Gotham, Bane’s brainchild of chaos. The poor were brutalizing the rich, no longer protected by their societal constructs. My heart broke a little for both of them; I could understand the frustrations of the downtrodden, I’ve been feeling those same frustrations along with the parallel demographic here in reality. Day after day, more news breaks that makes the working class want to wring the necks of every member in the upper echelon: tax evasion, employee abuse, wrangling the government in their favor.
But even as they were pummeling the socialites and ripping the fur coats of their wives, I was struck with a sickening feeling. Those wretches, condemned by their lavish emblems, could just as easily have been my friends. If nothing else, the vast majority must have been people like you or I, only acting according to their niche. We constantly generalize that most of the wealthy have committed terrible sins in the name of gaining and maintaining their status, and often with great veracity; but how often do we commit the same sins, hiding behind the title of “victim”? Admittedly, there must be some room for shades of gray: a man who steals to feed his family cannot be tried in equity with a man who cuts the chains from bicycles because it pays better than flipping burgers. It is too easy to lose sight of reality: the privileged possess a conflagration of good and evil just as much those on the other side of the tracks.
Admittedly, my greatest pleasure in life are stories of retribution, of the wicked getting their just desserts, but this was all wrong. This wasn’t justice; this wasn’t right.
Though the ones we call ‘fatcats’, the ones we fondly imagine to be having panic attacks over thoughts of having to downgrade from an Aston-Martin to a BMW if the government ever one day stood up for the poor, were undeniably responsible for creating their own doom, those they oppressed instantly lost all righteousness when they descended upon their oppressors like starving wolves. I couldn’t help but feel that those who lose their humanity, lose their trampled human rights the instant they become animals to avenge said rights, as well any pleas for sympathy concerning their former condition.
As the fantasy of dystopic, physical class-warfare seems to nudge ever so nearer to reality, the message of The Dark Knight Rises, as well as the two films before it, becomes clear: this is our fusion bomb. When shit hits the fan, when fences come down and we are all left on our own to act as we see fit, how will we act? Will we retain our humanity? Will we live up to all those lofty promises we call out as we rally with picket signs and occupy city parks? Or will we relive the Parisian afterglow, committing crimes with the guillotine just as terrible, if not worse, than those of our victims?
Bane is here, lurking in the shadows. It may never come to the point where his chaos is unleashed upon us, but if it does, it will be the greatest trial of our race; a trial that determines whether the concept of “humanity“, a demarcation between divine consciousness from nature, actually exists, or is merely a title of vanity bestowed by animate lumps of organic compounds upon themselves. In a generation that accuses one percent of its population as unable to make the right decision or serve anyone but themselves, if the other ninety-nine percent cannot succeed where the rest have failed, our race will surely lose any right to appeal the looming sentence.
The backbone of Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy is more than just movie-magic. It’s a message of philosophic value, on par with the loftiest literature that teaches truth and beauty to those who dare to read. What do we take from it? Do we put down our picket signs and allow injustice to spread as it will, as monks who wear masks for fear of killing microbes in the act of breathing? Do we trust those with power to follow their good conscious, asking them nicely from time to time to stop marginalizing us? Certainly not. As much as the Batman films cluster people together as populations; the rich, the poor, the crazies, the criminals, the protectors; we must take to our hearts the lessons of the individual it offers. Do what is right for others, not just for yourself. Be circumspect in your decisions. Above all, protect the values of free thinking, democracy, and justice for all.
To the Occupy Texas movement, Occupiers everywhere, and beloved country:
Recently, a letter has been circulating among our protest groups, authored by Webster G. Tarpley. The main anterior body of the document warns against the fallibility of our work as being “leaderless groups” with “no specific demands, reforms, or concrete measures whatsoever”. Whether or not we as a collective entity decide to publish ourselves as a political entity is something we will have to fully consider, with unanimity. The threat of being “hijacked” by existing political interests to either extinguish or demoralize the flames, or to claim solidarity with us to further their own existing views is very credible. We may choose to continue to be loosely organized, a sea of separate ideology that cries for specific, unified demands. This may work, it may not. In such a case, the worst case scenario is that before the end of our struggle, or after it, our movement becomes a parallel of the French Revolution, with the development of myriad factions vying for control in disharmony.
If we do choose to consolidate our demands and views into a platform, we must lay the groundwork very soon, with fully transparent and unanimous parameters that preserve the integrity and ideals that this movement began with. The revolution our forefathers engineered to free themselves of tyranny from across the Atlantic was a rare event in history, and has rarely, if ever, been imitated since. The idealists of this revolution consolidated themselves early, and had specific plans of contingency agreed upon far before the first shots were fired. We may find success if we imitate their movements.
Ancient Greece had a word for a person who was conscientiously and actively involved in their community: polites. It’s antonym was idiotes, a person who shuns the affairs of the state and is only concerned with themselves. If we must converge on any ideological platform, it must be a platform of polites, an ideology for the citizens and by the citizens. It must consider all views of it’s proponents, and even its opponents in logical, dialectical debate. It must have foundations prepared to keep it dynamic and current, so instances of rhetoric that do not identify with it’s modern constituents do not develop. Most of all, it must guarantee that its figureheads and think-tanks never overshadow the will and wisdom of the people.
We have an incredible opportunity to create a unique platform due to our age of communication and technology. We have the opportunity for a platform that may not need physical conventions, physical transportation, and costly campaigns that plague the integrity of our old political factions. A platform that may use the benefits of instant, open-forum communication to insure expediency and full transparency to the people.
It is entirely possible for a platform such as this may operate successfully through volunteers, without any sort of monetary contributions to defile it. If it is ever decided to be necessary or appropriate to accept monetary contributions, such transactions must be restricted and monitored with a scrutinous eye.
There must be reasonable caps to contributions to ensure equality, so that the contribution of one man may not have considerably more or less weight than another. If a platform receives 10% of it’s contributions in the sum of greater than $500,000 dollars, and 80% of it’s contributions in the sum of $100 or less, it becomes apparent which interests carry more weight, and a corrupting sway may develop among present and future organizers. If 50% of it’s contributions are %1,000 – $101, and the remainder is over $100 or less, unfair influence is far less detectable. Such a cap as $1000 per capita may best serve to promote equality and universal goodwill among contributing interests. Furthermore, all contributions must be accepted solely from individuals, not from business or non-profit entities.
It may even be prudent to go as far as mandating all donations be made under complete anonymity, to ensure that the contributor is doing so because he agrees with the current platform, which has been drafted by the applicable concerns of citizens, not because he wants to inject his or her views into it. Finally, all income and expenditures of such a platform must be made readily public and transparent, not just to it’s subscribers, but to the entire population. These sentiments must immediately be written into the constitution of any resulting platform.
Again, to reflect the unanimity and universality of the movement which begot it, guarantees which protect the views and speech of all it’s constituents, as well as that an unsubscribed populace must be patented. We must have a process of electing or appointing figureheads who are selected from polites who have only one motivation, to serve their countrymen and neighbors. I propose a vow of the polite, so to speak. Just as soldiers must make certain sacrifices to individuality and freedom to effectively serve their country, so must one who wishes to serve their country in the matter of politics. Being necessary to serve only the interests of the people, a public servant must be wholly and solely devoted to that office. They may not hold office in any conflicting interest, nor be in the profit of any private business. Their existing investments must be independently and separately managed by a public institution while in a position of power, and have their private incoming transactions and accounts made and kept public for the duration of their office, so that the people may be alerted to any undue monetary influence. Expenditures may be kept private, to afford the public servant some semblance of privacy in their personal life. Most will be apprehensive to the idea, but I assure you that such a practice will have the immediate benefit of discouraging all who would seek office for personal gain, and attract only those who would solely devote themselves to the welfare of the people. Public policy and personal interest must be kept as far at odds as possible.
I acknowledge the idea of a platform in this early stage of a delicate and dangerous game will worry, or even offend, our congregation of independent, free-thinking people. We must however consider that such a thing may inevitably develop, and if it does, it must be done right. We are rapidly approaching a moment of critical mass, and with no contingencies for an endgame our world may be doomed to a repeat of past mistakes and reinstatement of the status quo that we are fiercely fighting against. Whatever we decide our demands to be, we must make for them a vessel that will withstand the squalls, navigate through still seas, and shift with the tides.
I encourage all who read this address to fully and thoughtfully consider these ideas, edit them to formulate independent ideas, and even to debate or refute them. They are wholly subject to scrutiny, and must be, considering that they are put forth to further ideals inspired by a movement grounded in fairness, universality and complete and utter democracy. I write out of love for my country, and the hope which has been inspired by its brave people. I wish for the success and prosperity of humanity everywhere: a unifying, newly-awakened people; I will trust in their wisdom.
Your brother, neighbor, and servant, Robbie Rodgers, San Antonio, Texas. October 7, 2011.
guy de truc 