Wednesday, June 2, 2021

The Struggle

I've got a jumble of thoughts to sort out, and it's tied to the following: Philip II, current politics, and the TV show Word of Honor (now on Netflix).

Let me think about how to order my thoughts...

I started watching Word of Honor because the people I've come in contact with through The Untamed fandom have already watched it. It's another Chinese drama, though it has less of the fantasy aspects of The Untamed. I'd been seeing gifs for a while and was somewhat interested, so when it appeared on Netflix over the long weekend I pretty much had to start watching. (Now if only Netflix could get Nirvana in Fire.)

I won't go into too much about it here (I'll probably right something more once I've finished it), but there was a moment with one of the villains that I wanted to discuss.

He's basically gained power through disreputable and immoral means, and he was talking about his ambitions and all the great things he was going to do...

And the thing of it is, people like that are always sure that they will. That they're going to bring in a 'golden age', or make their nation/clan/family/tribe the best.

And yet the methods they chose contained the seeds of their own destruction. (yes, it's a bit cliché. But it's a cliché because there's truth in it.)

They want to do all those fantastical things, but they made enemies along the way and face opposition... Often so much so that they grow angry and resentful over it. (I think I heard Trump make a statement along these lines. They never see their own role in creating the opposition that prevents from doing all those things they imagine will be good. Related to this... They take people who try bringing a reality check, try giving honest feedback and info necessary for actually making a plan to reach those goals as threats and obstacles to get around. They can't distinguish from feedback that helps actually turn their goals into reality from the opposition they blame for blocking those goals).

Its like... How you get to your goal is as important as the goal itself, and some tactics are ultimately self defeating. 

This is where I lump all the patronizing 'I know what's best, and I will force you all to do it my way' stuff. It's often the underlying belief for an authoritarian leader, which is why the ideology and goal is often not as important when describing them. (Stalin, Mao, Hitler.. Goals and ideologies may differ, but the know-it-all attitude that sees dissent as a threat is similar. Take that with a grain of salt, as I haven't done a serious case study comparing all three. But it'd be interesting to contrast the three of them with leaders like George Washington.) 

The tie in with Philip II is this... Philip II was a Hapsburg ruler primarily known for ruling Spain in the late 1500s. He saw himself as the defender of Catholic Europe and wasted a lot of resources trying to keep the Netherlands from going Protestant. (Life was very different back then in terms of nationalism and the Hapsburgs married so much European nobility that they controlled territory in a wide variety of places now considered different countries. Also, i am not sure how much self-interest vs devout faith played a role in the religious wars that devastated Europe back then - and ultimately convinced our Founders of the importance of separating church and state - but Philip II was quite devout and shows that it wasn't entirely above profit and self-interest. What was it someone said? When self interest and ideology align there's a greater chance of action than when only one or the other is involved? Makes sense, and is probably why everyone tries so hard to find a moral justification for the things they want to do.) 

Anyways. As people probably know, the Netherlands are not Catholic, and are definitely not part of Spain anymore, so Philip II ultimately failed. He was seen as ruling at the height of Spanish power, but one could argue that his persistent belief that God wanted him to take action against Protestants (and the Ottoman Empire) were a factor in his squandering the resources he had and ultimately led to the decline of the Spanish Empire. (again, go find an actual historian who can talk with more depth and detail and take my statement with a grain of salt). 

This exemplifies some of my underlying beliefs, and the reasoning thereof. Did God want Europe to stay Catholic? Or become Protestant? I don't really know, and I don't think any of us really knows. But I do think He cares thinks that disrespecting people's free will and forcing them to convert to one religion or another is far more of a problem than whether they believe in transubstantiation or not. And that the 'winners', if you can call any of them that, were the ones that learned to tolerate multiple religions. (it's part of why current politics are so frustrating. Our Founding Fathers didn't want to get involved in any way, shape, or form with the bloody religious wars in Europe and created the First Amendment - as the first amendment - to try to avoid all that. And now we have ignorant fools trying to justify a theocracy and claim its what our founding fathers would have wanted. Haven't enough people died over this stupidity?  Hell, even Mohammad said there should be no compulsion in religion. What is so freaking hard to understand about that?!? Forcing and compelling people to do what you think God wants us more of an insult to God than the sins you think you are saving them from.) 

I don't really care how many Bibles they thump or crosses they show. When they try forcing everyone to follow their religious beliefs they are NOT speaking with or for God in any way, shape, or form. 

And no matter how much they think they'll do good things if they had power, no matter how much they justify funding liars and spreading disinfo, they'll never do the great things they envision. 

If they want to bring more people to God, or build a kingdom of God, or all those religious ideals... It won't be by imposing it from above, but by helping create the type of systems that help people learn to come to it on their own. (sort of like the concept of 'inner jihad', or rather learning how to support people in their own inner jihad). 

Spreading lies and hatred takes people further away from that. It's manipulative and makes people less of themselves, and I do not care what sort of justifications the people using such tactics have. They are wrong. 


No comments:

Post a Comment