(no subject)

[capri0mni]

If I prove honey-mouth'd, let my tongue blister
And never to my red-look'd anger be
The trumpet any more. --
Paulina, preparing to confront the king about his abuse of the queen.
The Winter's Tale, Act II, scene ii

I've been wanting to write an angry song about what's happening to my country for a while now. I want to write something that would shock upstanding, Christian patriots, the way Alan Ginsberg's Howl shocked people 50 years ago.

I want to take our national anthem, and turn it on its head.

I want to shame people for their reverent fear of Satan.

Maybe those are two different songs, but maybe not.

You see, I believe the opposite of love is not hate, but fear. You can have a love-hate relationship with someone, but never a love-fear relationship. Love opens us up to the world, and gives us the courage to take risks. Liberty and democracy depend on love. Fear shuts us down. Tyrannies depend on fear.

And the Bush Administration, even with only 31% approval in the polls, is, somehow, getting political traction with his terrorism chant; I kept hearing on the news this morning how Democrats who complain about warrentless wiretapping are "shooting themselves in the foot, because most people don't care about losing civil liberties, as long as we're kept safe."*

"Oh say: Does that star-spangled banner yet wave over the land of the free and the home of the brave?"

And Satan is the personified embodiment of fear. Just as, for Christians, Jesus is the personified embodiment of Love. That's why it bothers me so much when self-identified Christians seem to put greater stock in the existance of Satan than they do in Jesus.

And I want it to be a song, instead of an essay or pamphlet, because the singing voice has more energy behind it than the speaking voice.

But I don't think, if I ever write such a song, it would be very good. Because I'd be starting with an intellectual idea, rather than a spontaneous feeling.

But in any case, I want to write an un-sweet song.

I'm just not sure how.

*The argument that the NSA wiretapping is working (because we haven't been attacked again) reminds me of an old Bert and Ernie bit on Sesame Street: Ernie is standing calmly in his living room, with a banana in his ear. Bert asks him why. "To keep the wild elephants away," he answers. When Bert protests that that's ridiculous, Ernie says: "Well, you don't see any elephants around, do you?"

Comments

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

Remember that love and fear are tied closely together in Christianity. How many times have you heard someone described as a "God-fearing Christian"? Are the people who would consider that to be a compliment also the people who would preach God's infinite love and mercy?

Maybe that's the only place anyone can have a love/fear relationship with something.

Anyways, I'm not trying to make a point, other than pointing out a connection or a bit of symbolism that may be useful to a poet. ^__^

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

Are the people who would consider that to be a compliment also the people who would preach God's infinite love and mercy?

Hmmm. My glib answer to that is: Well, that's why I was born-again as a Pagan. -_^

My straight answer to that is: But I think, in the context of that phrase, "fear" means "respect for the awesome power of," in the same way that fear for the power of gravity keeps me a respectible distance from the cliff's edge. And it is certainly possible to have a love & awe relationship.

But the fear of Satan is terror. As I pointed out in this post (http://capriuni.livejournal.com/190343.html), it seems that many Christains are especially unwilling to even question Satan's place in their theology, for good or ill -- all while questions about Jesus's disciples and family abound. In fact, the only history I've come across that addressed the issue of Satan's place in Christain thought was written from a Jewish perspective (Satanizing of the Jews: Origin and Development of Mystical Anti-Semitism (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0880641525/qid=1147141532/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-5821269-7913440?v=glance&s=books)). I sometimes wonder if it's because the Divine Reason for the Crucifixion was so that he could go through Hell and defeat Satan.* If Satan weren't in the picture, then it brings the Crucifixion that much closer to simply being "Man's inhumanity to Man." And that's a lot harder to face. So Satan may not be more important than Jesus, but it seems, to many, he's at least as important.

And it really is the importance given to Satan, theologically, which is the biggest reason I cannot see myself ever going back to Christianity. Because I believe the Christain concept of Satan (which was later adopted as part of Islam), to be one of the most dangerous theological concepts ever.

Not only is Satan the Major General of the Army of Fallen Angels, fighting to overthrow the Kingdom of God, but he recruits privates into his army from among humans living on Earth. And since the very existance of the Universe itself is at stake, then hanging those recruits, burning them at the stake, pressing them to death, or torturing them in secret prisons becomes perfectly justifiable.

If Satan did exist, and wanted to plant a single idea in the minds of humans in order to ensure that they do his work, it would be the Idea of Satan.

Anyway, I wonder if this unquestioning acceptance of Satan's role is one reason why so many people are so willing to accept, without question, Bush's authority to usurp certain civil liberties in the name of fighting Evil.

*(in the Canonical New Testament, the Gnostic Gospels say it's for better union with God).