Read, The Brothers Karamazov

 

Rambo: First blood, Should have ended all wars

To talk about this movie, is to start from the end. Because, that is where it "starts" to dawn on the viewer what exactly, the whole presentation is about. The breakdown sequence is one of the best I have viewed in movies. Stallone understood the gravity of that scene so well and has given it his all. The reaction of the senior to the outburst is most mature and soothing. The viewer is made to understand both sides of the situation. The viewer feels for both the characters and what they represent. It is such a beautiful depiction of the ill effects of war and we still in 2022, are fighting wars. It is one of the few movies, wherein the "Hero" feels a common man. It is also a movie where all the actions in the 99% of the movie, is justified by the 1% of "that" scene.

 The thing is, the Rambos are understanding that wars are passe. However, people giving "orders" want to continue to do so. That last scene, the outburst is the summary of any soldier fighting wars. It is a summary for all the "civilians" who don't participate in war but are either for or against it, vocally. It all boils down to jingoism being fed into the minds of people which makes theme either for or against it. Similar to religion where, you are for a particular religion or against it. It is difficult to understand how one civilized country can get into another civilized country and start proclaiming ownership. It is not going to happen in 2022. In 2022 nobody wins wars. In 2022 anybody can go to war. But, there will be no winners. However, there will be continuous losers throughout the existence of the nations. 

2022 and further will all be consensus through dialogue. I hope forwards from 2022, nations stop investing in military equipment/technology. There are ample examples of how investment in military has provided technical boons to all humans. What if, instead of investing in military, the same is invested directly into goods for all mankind. Every nation spends much of their money towards military equipment. This business is ensured by business marketing "ill will" between nations. These businesses will first invest in creating "them an we". Once a sale is done, does it stop. No. A subsidiary of the same business will sell countering military equipment to the other nation on a different brand name. See, it is again "We and them".

If Charlie Chaplin's splendid speech in the Great dictator is a classic and at a very higher intellectual level. I would rate the breakdown scene in Rambo 1 as common man's rendition of the same idea. Wars, don't win anything. There are always losses, to both sides. Killing people in the name of war has a legitimacy attached to it. It is dubbed "moral". The same killings by a "disturbed person" is dubbed "crime". In fact, the information brigade has made "war crime" morally acceptable to people in the name of national security. I fail to understand how we have transformed to accepting killing people in the name of war, acceptable and be proud of losses to the nation we belong.

Brideshead revisited aka Aristocracy revisited aka WWII revisited aka religion revisited aka innocence revisited

After reading orlando, I wanted an easy go book. Brideshead revisited has been consistently recommended by seasoned as well as young readers. So I took it up and let me be frank that I was a tad surprised by the breadth of coverage in the book. The writing is easy paced and the vocabulary requirements are standard.

The book starts interestingly in world war 2 and goes back and forth. Reliving the nostalgic memories brings in the book brings back your own as you go through the book. The characters are relatable. Yes, we dont have as many aristocratic families as in the good old time. We still do have pretty rich families wherein a similar pattern is observed. The camaraderie between two friends is brought out beautifully. In fact this is the portion I like immensely. The character build up of the two friends is fantastic and this makes all the situations which will be shown to us in the future believable and rooted in human relationships.

The expectation of a family from your near and dear friends is one more aspect which is brought out nicely. Each family is selfish in the fact that they see what the friend can bring or do to make their sibling better at the expense of not understanding the friend and his needs. The other thing is as the characters grow up, we see the maturity and the different views they have on life get concrete and they run after worldly pursuits. Only when the characters pause in their life and think about their experiences do they feel the right or wrong they did.

Alcoholism is again shown as it should be. When you are drunk you might feel better but when you wake up you are deeper in sorrow and you go so deep that nobody can dig you out. Religion is queried enough. The right questions asked with no right answers.

Love is complicated.

Should people work to live

There is one common thread in all of the world's religion. Work. Every living being has its purpose. This purpose is nothing but something to be done, work, again. All theologians talk about a super being and all the rules to worship that deity. They just differ in minor ways but the intent is to direct you towards an all encompassing entity. But, religion cannot exist out in thin air. It requires people, alive. How do you keep people alive. How do you provide for this. You make them work. Include passages/writings/rules in the framework which somehow tells this is one way to reach the one. In fact you can afford the path to the one only if you work. It is like a minimum requirement to be part of the religion. In fact work has created rifts among the people over the entire human history and continue to do so. With written knowledge now available to all the human beings, The classification is going to be different in the near future. We are going to have a world wherein everybody will be educated. There will no more be a situation where a select few can read the written knowledge being passed on from previous generations. Suddenly this generation can read all the knowledge generated over all the 20 centuries and is available to everybody with minimum effort. With this it will be difficult to get people to work based on old rules of caste/color/region etc. There have to be other means where you have to create dependency which in turn will force people to work willfully without knowing it. It will be more efficient compared to the older models where you forced them to work.

All the economic theories/political theories are not alien to it. In fact these ideologies talk about work in a direct sense. Working people is the basis of all the present economic/political frameworks. Even Marx's thoery starts and ends with work and workers. In fact it starts to quantify work in the best possible way. Ok...ok, I got it. You are telling me that there have been recent experiments where a minimum amount is paid as a "wage" and the individual is not required to work in the traditional sense. Why are the people in these experiments being paid. This is an ideology wherein the system is expecting contributions from the individual on his own. It is pressurizing the individual to contribute out of commitment by paying advance salary. It is a proven fact that actions/efforts happening unconsciously/willfully takes minimum effort of the brain. This arrangement of work can be utilized to increase the throughput of the effort required to complete a job.

Are we born to work. Should we work to survive. Are we not entitled to live on this planet without doing any work. Is minimum wage the answer for the 1% to keep the 99% working. Should the 99% work.

The power of silence

Has anybody tired to be silent for a moment. I mean real silence, with the aim to "really" be silent. Can the human brain really alienate all the sounds, sounds within and external to it. I am going to make  a huge statement here. If you can be silent for even a moment in the true sense, that moment...... I dont know..... I cannot explain it. Many philosophers who have mastered this tried to explain it, in their own ways and ended up creating more noise in the name of beliefs, caste and religion. All diluting the purpose of the explanation of the philosophers. Even going as far as formulating procedures, rules and steps giving rise to superstitions and forceful procedures lacking logic. Now, some stronger groups created religion and others satisfied themselves into secret cults. These secret cults thought that they now know the meaning of nirvana and imagined that the other people around them are not capable of understanding. But, the reality is these people are more narrow in their approach and are more dogmatic than those of religion.

Now, we know the limitations of the spoken as well as the written language. We still dont have all the vocabulary of human body language. So, you really cannot express the hundred percent of what you wanted to convey nor can understand in its totality a communication directed towards us.


Oh, How much, I am in awe of philosophers who achieved that silence state and could do so at their will, anytime and anywhere. I think the people in power, the rulers, knew and know now that if humans are left alone without giving them an ulterior motive(the least resistance path), then they would yearn for a broader perspective(That would be the least resistance path, when compared to boredom).

Certain people who did achieve momentary temporary silence, want to commercialize it, sell it, like a commodity(again an ulterior motive). A real philosopher or a normal man clearly see the temporariness in the process, but, commoditization is always a cheap way to achieve power in the present consumerist society.

Can morality be taught. Is morality numero uno or is it relative to higher morals. is there a lesser and a higher moral for a particular cause.  Is higher morality a requirement for achieving the silence state. Dont you think a temporary state of the highest level of morality enough to create that temporary state of nirvana maybe for a few micro/nano seconds. That time window is more than enough for a human being to decide the right or wrong for a long time. Can we at least achieve this.

You are telling me now, that if everybody is at peace with themselves and we do have a very serene world, then would we survive in paradise. Is a human being made for life in paradise? Let us become a little practical and include the world sustainability with a higher level of morality, will that be practical?  With this scenario can a human being be at peace with himself for brief periods of time so as to lead a happy life?

Silence, the every alluding factor, making one completely dissolve into the external and internal factors, leaving no difference at all with the entire world, will we be able to feel the enormous of the universe, did the philosophers feel it, thereby, deciding that the present life of the mortal humans is null? Did I hear something. Oh, You are telling me that I have to run to the Himalayas to meet the first requirement, nullify the external noise. Yes, I do agree with you on this point. Many have gone to the Himalayas with the same hope. But what about the internal noise. Can it be suppressed with a similar practical strategy? In the absence of the external noise, the internal noise will be louder and unbearable. So, I will allow you to think about it.

No, No .........Nah, I am not hinting at sanyasa. My argument is about net positive sustainability of human life. Is silence God, Is it the elusive dark energy, which is supposed to explain the entire universe or the multiverse to us? Is it just a null feel which cannot be expressed....................