Log in

No account? Create an account
avril 2019   01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
* - galaxy

Spite - Part 2

Posted on 2012.08.16 at 22:00
Yes, inividuals are naive and vain, and not humbled by the long painful scours of history, and do not see for miles and mles, but make the same mistakes of fools, over and over again. They believe themselves "winning" when merely DESTROYING. And each is of thousands of cuts in the slow, accelerating crash of the body of empire, drawing with it the curtains of civilisation. All by the hand of one spiteful man, repeated countless times, even working against his own interests - what more the common interests of our planet?

As I have said, Nether Girl now fears me - fear of a great backlash of the sins she inflicted on me, to now fall on her. Stop short of identifying true cause and effect - true responsibility - and instead merely blame me now, where she ha hitherto assumed me blaming her. This is the world the insane inhabit. Vanity is vain for it sees the same no matter what is invested, expecting the same abstract outcome when none should come from the superstitious cacklings of insanity. Vanity. And so, guilt lies fallow after the exhaustive drought, barren and vulnerable. Guilt runs in shame of its nakedness. Guilt inherently follows from the naivity of projecting blame upon others, especially the innocent. The only way to resolve guilt is to own up to reality and repent, or else to devolve into an addiction of blame or rape with subsequent guilt. Repeat. Plunder. Plunder more. Capitalise. Monopolise. Print more money to feed the debt in the addiction.

The question was: Why do people inflict spiteful actions, when it shall only bring themselves down as well? I have a simple, cursory explanation, which may complement various others. And it is this: Abstracted egos, blind faith in false idols, abidance in the self-delusions of the state, emotional investment in promises of propaganda, identification with a handful of winners whilst one falls into a cold, enfolding mass grave of startled losers - these all feed into vanity. Spite comes from a sense of entitlement, (conflicting with the ignored reality). Like the paradoxical learning of Pavlov's dogs, become gluttons for punishment, the spiteful become addicted to propping up their false egos by putting others down. Inherently degrading social institutions or politcal groups rise up around these biases of privilege, to reinforce and protect the priviledge, and legitimise the spite, or insipid bullying behaviour. But identification with these institutions are often vain and tenuous, as it was with George Zimmerman. Free credit, thought to legitimise reckless gun usage, suddenly disappears - poof, like the housing bubble in 2006-2008.

Well, why so vainly assume privilege? Because one has paradoxically learnt to think of some of their wants THAT THEY ARE INSTEAD "NEEDS". It's very simple. It is more important to harm another for some vain pursuit, because that vain pursuit is not felt to be merely a WANT, it is seen as a need so strong that it is more important than the losses incurred to oneself. Abstractly, those losses, then, are tabulated very incorrectly. This is risk-assessment deformed and perverted into right-on, dead ahead destructiveness. Of course, spiteful actions are often passive-aggressive, from shy bully-wannabe's. But get a mob of these spiteful folks behind a uniting bully, and you suddenly have NAZIsm, once again, repeating the same crimes of history. Give the people some real puppet to which they can project their imagined privilege, and so rights and leeways, and suddenly all institutions fall into this political power.

That's about all I can manage for now. My brain is in a massive headache. You can go back a month or two to my posts about passive aggression and groupism, which are also very relevant. ("Spite" part 1 was posted yesterday or maybe today - http://madman101.livejournal.com/1177551.html). Spite! Score one more for the team! Locked like pathetic ants in each other's mandibles while all the world burns around them. An where does spite isue from the most? More on groupism and privilege later.

Games have been elevated to greater importance than reality itself. Greater than survival itself.


Evil Tracey
eviltracey at 2012-08-18 18:54 (UTC) (Lien)

My experience with spiteful people...

is that they're trying to preserve an illusion of power and control (if only to themselves) when they actually have none. In doing so, they actually show others that they are small, petty pathetic trolls.

In Laura Ingalls Wilder's On The Banks of Plum Creek, all the girls at Laura and Mary's new school play ring-around-the-rosy at recess, because that's what Nellie Oleson (mean girl and bully) wants. Laura , who is new to the school, suggests that they play something else, and the other girls enthusiastically agree. Nellie goes ballistic and starts pushing Laura around and pulling her hair. The other girls keep playing the new game, though, and Nellie eventually flounces off. That's how I view some of the spiteful people I know.

NB: Edited for punctuation.

Edited at 2012-08-18 18:56 (UTC)
where hypotheses come to die
madman101 at 2012-08-18 19:35 (UTC) (Lien)

Re: My experience with spiteful people...

hi - my brain needs to deal w/ paragraph #2 later - but as for #1, I completely agree...

and I have been thinking about this, (even though I have misplaced two main ideas on it for the moment) - and one thought is similar: the game becomes so important that they must "WIN" at all costs, but the definition of "winning" has shifted to "cheating" - they don't see the dif, and feel safe that that the game continues to protect them

thanks - this is a topic i am sure to keep working on!!
Evil Tracey
eviltracey at 2012-08-18 20:01 (UTC) (Lien)
My interpretation on that passage: Nellie is angry because she can't get her own way. Instead of sucking it up and playing with the other girls, or flouncing out at that moment, she lashes out at Laura. In doing so, she confirms that she's a spoiled brat who actually doesn't have as much power in the schoolyard as she thinks she does.

(If you missed the books or the show, Nellie was the girl whose parents owned the one general store in the town. She's shown as being more affluent than her peers, and clearly thinks that this should give her power at her school.)</p>

It's amazing how many Nellie Olesons there are, and how many people related to Laura Ingalls' conflict with her. It certainly affected Alison Arngrim, who played Nellie on TV.

Previous Entry  Next Entry