Monday, December 21, 2009

Fight for what is right.

Bereft of hope. That is not an option. If I am to die tomorrow, I choose hope today. Not some futile illusion borne of expected disappointment. Not at all. A robust, tangible hope, the creation of the very best part of free will.

Here an undercurrent of despair ... nothing left but to fight. Fight for right. Fight and die for what is right. But most of all, fight to prove we are right. When exactly did fighting become more important than correct? Who defined correct? Did he/she/they have a friendly agenda? Seems a reasonable question given the circumstances of the moment. Fighting is simple, far less ambiguous than correct.

A collection of questions playing like a clip from a popular song "stuck in my head" stopped cold in its tracks. And someone shouts "Who do I have to kill to make peace" and the chorus chimes in "who do we have to kill to prevent war" and the reply "who do we have to brutally repress to insure peace" and as if echoing in a canyon, each echo slightly different sounding than the one that preceded it. After many reflections off the canyon walls:

"What formula do we apply to stop this craziness", clearly the circle is not yet complete.

"The channel is too noisy, Captain. We will keep trying". And so it was. Familiar but less frustrating of late.

1 comment:

  1. A triumphant general but a few years back led the country because a majority of the people chose him . His political persuasion reflected his confidence in what a long military career had taught about leadership when the last resort was the only option.

    The message still resonated even when the hottest war turned into, can you believe it, for the first time, a "cold" war. This time where fear itself became the weapon of choice. Called strategic weapons then, more recently, weapons of mass destruction.

    He chose to rename the presidential retreat, then called Shangri-La, Camp David.