I just sat down with a steaming caramel latte. I inhaled the rich, enticing aroma of my extra shot of espresso and sighed. Coffee's just not the same in North America. There's filtered, and then there's overly flavored so people can say they drink coffee without actually doing so. No one really goes beyond that and explores the exuberant variety that Australia so graciously offered me. But here, one is too black, the other is mostly sugar. Of course, that's all a matter of opinion. I've had to find ways of compromising without paying two grand for a nice machine myself, or being trouble for any barista who has already had to deal with impatient, nitpicky customers all day long.
I reached for the procurable newspaper in front of me and flipped through the Saturday special. Under top news there it screamed. "Vigilante Justice Rears Its Ugly Head". I leaned forward in my chair. Whenever I hear that word, only one thing comes to mind. Rorschach. The psychotic arbiter of Alan Moore's 80's Watchmen graphic novel. What fascinated me about his character was in no way was he ever "super". Just another man who took citizen's arrest too far and found his own way of justifying others. Usually by killing the sinful perpetrators straight up.
I continued to read the article. News year’s day, three men apprehended and continued to beat up a man attempting to steal a car sheltering a woman and child. Would I have done the same thing considering the situation? What was he going to do with the people inside? If I was by myself I really doubt I would be able to take on a grown man considering my lack of training this year, unless of course he was scared and the adrenaline pumping through my body created some sort of chemical reaction to which my muscles responded by growing just enough to do the job. Hmmm...Wishful thinking. This leads me to another thought. If two men of equal weight and size faced off, one was driven by the most impending fear and the other was driven strictly by anger...who would win? Does drive actually determine outcome? Like a woman lifting a car off her child? Or a boy beating up his father for hitting his mother? Both extremely unlikely and both have happened.
So what is right? Would it be my right to put on a mask and defend my city from disgusting injustice? Is it right for me to ignore the police and the law and do it myself out of impatience and distaste for the law's biased inclination? Or is it really not my job in the first place. Is it anyone’s? And yet...I suppose justice is social and revenge is personal. But what happens when the law is lawless? A vigilante motivated purely by ethical sanction and not his own desires for a personal bubble of right would have to be at least giving police a break, if not making others feel safer at night. Just knowing someone is out there. Not in uniform. Not with warning lights. As long as the police aren't resting in that fact and creating loopholes to which the entire law would eventually slide through. I can just see the headlines now. "Police Send Young Arsonist to Hospital." The rest of the article would talk about how the cops also realize that the youth justice act is a fallacy and break the kids legs knowing he'll walk away unscathed by the justice department and never serve a day in his life. So they see what the vigilante's do and send him to the hospital, knowing at least he'll remember what he did now. That may seem a little ridiculous, but a possible eventual truth none the less.
But now you may think I abhor the idea of people taking the law into their own hands no matter what the cost. Not true. I in fact admire people for standing up for what's right and banding together to finally say "Enough". People are getting tired of lawbreakers. People have had it with disrespect. I've often thought this world was just waiting to burn. But it's people like the men I mentioned at the beginning who actually give everyone else hope in future government.
I’m writing a book. A novel in fact. One chapter describes a conversation held by two men. One fighting for social justice on his own accord, the other waiting for it. The latter says this,
"You think you're saving this city from its sins, when in fact, you’re causing people to become better at tearing themselves apart. When a species is threatened in the long run, what does it do? It grows. It mutates. It becomes better. Evolution makes way for the stronger. And we’re still here. So no matter what you think you’re doing, you’re only speeding up the inevitable."
"And what is the inevitable?"
"Eventually the law will catch you. Humanity is a fallacy. No one was ever civilized.”
Now it may not be right to quote myself from an unpublished source but there’s also the other side. The side that sees vigilantes, masked in this case, as pests in need of extermination. People who see humanity taking the law into their own hands as dangerous. If those same people can get away with justifying others in their own manner, they are setting themselves up above the law and then it’s only a matter of time before the dark side starts looking a little brighter. Who watches the watchmen in other words.
Who’s to say which side is right? Both have valid projections and both rely heavily on government involvement to stay alive. But which would get most reaction out of the public? People finally standing up for themselves? Or a stronger law enforcement supremacy with faster decisions and harsher consequences? Then which is more likely to ever happen?
After all is said and done, all you can do is read the article and throw the rest of the paper out. Which I did but not before I had ripped out that section of newspaper. I grabbed my latte and headed outside, greeted by minus thirty temperatures and a wind chill that made me throw out the rest of my drink because it was developing ice crystals. Whether or not the law changes dramatically, or I’m greeted by a futuristic version of Rorschach, or I become a vigilante myself, I remain alert, ready to take on any task to save my small universe at a moments notice. Ready to save the world if I’m asked. But maybe that’s the problem. No one’s asking. Maybe one just has to go “do” to save the world. And just maybe, sweatshop supported companies have more truth in their slogans then Greenpeace and WWF. We’ll see.
I reached for the procurable newspaper in front of me and flipped through the Saturday special. Under top news there it screamed. "Vigilante Justice Rears Its Ugly Head". I leaned forward in my chair. Whenever I hear that word, only one thing comes to mind. Rorschach. The psychotic arbiter of Alan Moore's 80's Watchmen graphic novel. What fascinated me about his character was in no way was he ever "super". Just another man who took citizen's arrest too far and found his own way of justifying others. Usually by killing the sinful perpetrators straight up.
I continued to read the article. News year’s day, three men apprehended and continued to beat up a man attempting to steal a car sheltering a woman and child. Would I have done the same thing considering the situation? What was he going to do with the people inside? If I was by myself I really doubt I would be able to take on a grown man considering my lack of training this year, unless of course he was scared and the adrenaline pumping through my body created some sort of chemical reaction to which my muscles responded by growing just enough to do the job. Hmmm...Wishful thinking. This leads me to another thought. If two men of equal weight and size faced off, one was driven by the most impending fear and the other was driven strictly by anger...who would win? Does drive actually determine outcome? Like a woman lifting a car off her child? Or a boy beating up his father for hitting his mother? Both extremely unlikely and both have happened.
So what is right? Would it be my right to put on a mask and defend my city from disgusting injustice? Is it right for me to ignore the police and the law and do it myself out of impatience and distaste for the law's biased inclination? Or is it really not my job in the first place. Is it anyone’s? And yet...I suppose justice is social and revenge is personal. But what happens when the law is lawless? A vigilante motivated purely by ethical sanction and not his own desires for a personal bubble of right would have to be at least giving police a break, if not making others feel safer at night. Just knowing someone is out there. Not in uniform. Not with warning lights. As long as the police aren't resting in that fact and creating loopholes to which the entire law would eventually slide through. I can just see the headlines now. "Police Send Young Arsonist to Hospital." The rest of the article would talk about how the cops also realize that the youth justice act is a fallacy and break the kids legs knowing he'll walk away unscathed by the justice department and never serve a day in his life. So they see what the vigilante's do and send him to the hospital, knowing at least he'll remember what he did now. That may seem a little ridiculous, but a possible eventual truth none the less.
But now you may think I abhor the idea of people taking the law into their own hands no matter what the cost. Not true. I in fact admire people for standing up for what's right and banding together to finally say "Enough". People are getting tired of lawbreakers. People have had it with disrespect. I've often thought this world was just waiting to burn. But it's people like the men I mentioned at the beginning who actually give everyone else hope in future government.
I’m writing a book. A novel in fact. One chapter describes a conversation held by two men. One fighting for social justice on his own accord, the other waiting for it. The latter says this,
"You think you're saving this city from its sins, when in fact, you’re causing people to become better at tearing themselves apart. When a species is threatened in the long run, what does it do? It grows. It mutates. It becomes better. Evolution makes way for the stronger. And we’re still here. So no matter what you think you’re doing, you’re only speeding up the inevitable."
"And what is the inevitable?"
"Eventually the law will catch you. Humanity is a fallacy. No one was ever civilized.”
Now it may not be right to quote myself from an unpublished source but there’s also the other side. The side that sees vigilantes, masked in this case, as pests in need of extermination. People who see humanity taking the law into their own hands as dangerous. If those same people can get away with justifying others in their own manner, they are setting themselves up above the law and then it’s only a matter of time before the dark side starts looking a little brighter. Who watches the watchmen in other words.
Who’s to say which side is right? Both have valid projections and both rely heavily on government involvement to stay alive. But which would get most reaction out of the public? People finally standing up for themselves? Or a stronger law enforcement supremacy with faster decisions and harsher consequences? Then which is more likely to ever happen?
After all is said and done, all you can do is read the article and throw the rest of the paper out. Which I did but not before I had ripped out that section of newspaper. I grabbed my latte and headed outside, greeted by minus thirty temperatures and a wind chill that made me throw out the rest of my drink because it was developing ice crystals. Whether or not the law changes dramatically, or I’m greeted by a futuristic version of Rorschach, or I become a vigilante myself, I remain alert, ready to take on any task to save my small universe at a moments notice. Ready to save the world if I’m asked. But maybe that’s the problem. No one’s asking. Maybe one just has to go “do” to save the world. And just maybe, sweatshop supported companies have more truth in their slogans then Greenpeace and WWF. We’ll see.
Comments