posted on May, 1 2012 @ 06:06 PM
Am I MAD as Hell? Sure, you bet I am! Hell, I'm Mad as Hell that some fictional news anchor who couldn't even make up his mind whether or not he
should kill himself, and was so clearly and easily influenced by any force stronger than himself that he wound up adopting a nicely packaged
corporatized version of reality, has become some sort of iconic symbol of protest. Jesus H. Christ on a Popsicle stick! There is a profound
difference between opening up your window and sticking your head out and shouting "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" and
actually doing something that shows your not going to take it anymore. Sure, it may be cathartic to offer up such postured protest, but what the hell
does screaming "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" actually accomplish?
Let's be clear here. Even though Paddy Chayefsky's brilliant screenplay was quite disturbing in its prescience, and predicted the dog and pony show
that media would soon become, when people are hanging "mad as hell" posters on their wall's, or wearing this slogan on their T-shirts, this is no
different than those clowns who hang Sheperd Fairey Obama Hope posters on their wall and wear Che Guevera T-shirts as if this some how makes them a
revolutionary. As if Che Guevera was some sort of New York bohemian who lived in a Brownstone apartment building with hip exposed brick underneath
mauve dry wall, sipping cappuccino's below his Laurence Bradshaw portrait of Karl Marx, wearing a Trotsky T-shirt. Chayefsky was not suggesting that
protest was a powerful form of change, quite the opposite, he was suggesting we are all buffoons helplessly influenced by the media we have so
lovingly become addicted to. As if Barak Obama is some sort of anti-establishment revolutionary. Sigh.
Am I mad as hell? You bet I am, but what the hell is getting mad going to accomplish? People can get mad at Wall Street for being a thinly veiled
gambling casino, or people can get mad at the corruption of government officials, but this is tantamount to getting mad at an infant for crying, or
getting mad at a bee for buzzing, or getting mad at a dog for barking. Anger is a dangerous emotion to operate under. Few, if any, strong strategies
were made under anger, or rage. The effective strategies are those planned while operating under rational thought, which is a far cry from any
If people want to be mad, I certainly understand, as I said, I am mad as hell too, and I am not taking it anymore. However, my not taking it anymore
has meant standing tall and accepting the consequences of not acquiescing to tyranny. Does anyone honestly believe that all it takes to make a tyrant
go away is to open up their window and scream at the top of their lungs that they're "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore"? Obviously
countless people - some would argue 99% of the population - clearly believe that the best way to deal with tyranny is to "occupy" the streets and
protest, as if this protest is some sort of demand instead of what it really is, which is really just asking tyrants to play fair. Sigh.
The struggles I go through daily in refusing to acquiesce to the tyranny of the state, the tyranny of the majority, and the tyranny of ignorant is
more than daunting, it is more than overwhelming, it is flat out overbearing, and I would not wish the pain and suffering I experience on my worst
enemy, let alone good and decent people who just want justice. However, if we as individuals are ever going to reestablish justice, then we are
going to have to be willing to do more than just get mad as hell. We are going to have to be willing to get even. To level the playing field, which
should not be construed as some sort of Marxist agenda, but instead a simple call for individuals to embrace the free and open market that has always
existed. Some would call that free and open market the "black market" but those doing so are either tyrants or sycophants of tyrants. Level the
playing field by actually breaking free from the shackles of slavery and just being free.
Since we're here based upon a scene from a film, I would like to suggest another scene from the Star Trek film Wrath of Khan, where Captain Kirk
reveals how it was he beat the Kobayashi Maru computer simulation. Some would say he "cheated" by reprogramming the computer simulation which was
programmed as a no win scenario, but that in itself is a cheat because the only way to have a no win scenario is to manufacture one. Kirk's response
to this was what I call the Captain Kirk principle that states: When the rules work against you, change the rules!
The rules to any game do not exist to ensure than one player wins and the rest loose. The rules to any game are designed to ensure competition can
prevail. I am mad as hell, dare I say we are all mad as hell because the rules of the game have been rigged. We are all - or most of us - confronted
with a no win scenario. The only reasonable strategy to such a circumstance is to change the rules. Don't get mad, get even!