We need a plague!



The western world is so overfed and so full of itself that only a plague can save us. Wiping out three quaters of the whole population would do wonders. Setting fires for fun is only possible in here. No other place but the great Europe, the land of intelect and wisdom. And they say the americans are funny (you know, in the head).

And if the english are selling a gypsy fights DVD on ebay, we would have no problems bringing back whippings and filming them on DVD. Screw “The passion of JC”, this is the real deal. Imagine that. A full-lenght dvd, multiple cameras, a soundtrack, backstage info and more!

In the words of the immortal Joker (yeah, I know he dies in the end, ok?): This town needs an enema!


9 komentarjev na “We need a plague!

  1. Mayhem

    Rrrrright. A real philanthropist! Why not wipe out 3/4 of India? Or maybe we should exterminate the Chinese. It’s not Europe that’s overpopulated. Man.. stay away from the voodoo 😉

  2. ill-advised

    Don’t be silly, cookie. Setting fires for fun is possible anywhere. Let’s face it, lighting a fire is plain and simply fun. Those who have a house and a garden around it might be able to light a bonfire there, but in urban areas most people unfortunately don’t have this opportunity, so it’s only natural that eventually someone will try to set fire to buildings instead.

    So the kids wanted to have a bit of fun, and it got a bit out of hand. Big deal. What else is new? There’s no need to draw apocalyptic conclusions about the decadence of western civilization out of that. Young people have been up to mischievous doings ever since the beginning of time. And thank goodness for that; it’s the only worthwile thing most people have ever done in their entire lives.

    If you think that being overfed is the problem, just look at what happens in the poorer parts of the world. Children, and indeed people of all ages, commit far more crime than in the wealthier parts of the world, and what is worse they don’t do it for fun but out of dire necessity or out of desire for personal gain. And I for one consider it vastly preferable, if people feel they must harm others, that they do it for fun rather than for personal gain.

    Nor indeed to I see why reducing the population density (which, if I understand correctly, is one of the things you propose as the remedy for this decadence) should improve the matters so much. Firstly, population density is a very rough measure. Even in the middle ages, when there were much fewer people in Europe than now, the cities and villages were still fairly crowded — only there were fewer of them, with larger areas of barren wilderness in between. But people harming others comes not from the overall population density of an entire area, but rather of too many people living in proximity of each other and thus getting into each other’s way. Thus, merely a reduced population wouldn’t necessarily address these problems; it would need to be not only reduced but spread homogeneously over the entire territory. But it is doubtful if a society could function on such a basis.

    Besides, Mayhem has a good point; if you look at the Wikipedia page on population density: India 328, China 136, EU 114, France 110 people per square kilometer. Apparently then, if we want the people here to be as poor as those on some other continents, where they are so preoccupied by the pesky business of earning a living that they presumably have no time or incentive for crime, and thereby willy-nilly turn into paragons of virtue, we need a considerably higher rather than lower population.

    What we really need, on the other hand, is a society that is genuinely responsive to the needs and desires of its people. Once young people realize that their life will be one of pointless inane drudgery with absolutely no purpose to it beyond merely prolonging their bare existence, is it any wonder that some of them go mad and start setting fires to buildings? If the society has no more sympathy towards them than that, why on earth should it expect any more sympathy from them in turn? If, on the other hand, the society actually helped people achieve a worthwhile and desirable life, one with a sense of purpose and filled with meaningful and enjoyable activities, they would be considerably less motivated to seek pleasure in doing things which harm others. Of course, as long as the main goal of the entire society seems to be nothing but the further enrichment of the wealthy classes, we cannot hope that a better state of things will ever be brought about.

    P.S. Since you involved Americans in the comparison — why is the sport of setting fires to buildings so much worse than the popular U.S. pastime of coming to school with a gun and starting to shoot at your classmates and teachers in a wild frenzy of orgiastic murder? At the very least, one generally stands a better chance of escaping from a burning building than of dodging a bullet coming at him/her from a close distance.

  3. cookie

    By overfed and overcrowded I mean that people have so many things that they just don`t know what to do with their lives anymore. I understand crimes of necessity and passion. What I do not understand is crimes of boredom and amusement. Where is the point?

    The reason I am set on Europe rather than Chinese and/or Indians is because this is where I am. Europe. And this is where I want things to work and function in a normal matter. I know it sounds cruel but I do not care about India and China. They have their own problems and they have to deal with them.

    “Once young people realize that their life will be one of pointless inane drudgery with absolutely no purpose to it beyond merely prolonging their bare existence, is it any wonder that some of them go mad and start setting fires to buildings?”

    I agree with that. On some point. But then again, people do not always know what`s best for them. People think they know. But they don`t. Especially when it comes to knowing things about themselves, people are often clueless and confused. And from confusion comes pain. Setting a fire for fun and with it burning down a building is one of the results. And why do people do that? Because our society is overfed. We have everything at our disposal. We don`t have to fear for our lives, there`s no war or disease spreading across Europe, killing thousands by the minute, there`s not famine, there is nothing alarming happening right now that would affect the general population. The disease comes from within. It comes from individuals who are so bored and unimaginative that they cause mischief and pain. Out of amusement. They are not aware of their actions, they are not aware of the consequences, they are a walking kamikaze.

    Society does not help the individual, if that individual is not aware of the fact that he/she actually needs help. Society is not an omnipresent organisation that has its tentacles wrapped around every individual that takes part in it and is constantly saving him/her from the mischief and harm. This is not minority report.

    The “disease” spread to Europe from America. Shootings in school = setting fires. Americans were the first that experienced the land of the free, the land of treasures where you can have anything, anytime, anywhere. And look where it got them.

    Europe is travelling the same path. We have too much things. We are obsessed with the culture of material properties and we are not paying enough or in fact any attention to the culture. To the mind. And that is wrong. And it will be the death of us.

  4. ill-advised

    I think your expectations and standards are set way too low. Indeed, in my opinion it is precisely the willingness to put up with low standards that is the root of all the problems in our society. Apparently you suggest that, as long as most of the people aren’t dying of hunger or malaria, and/or living in makeshift mud hovels, the situation is quite OK and there is nothing to worry about. In reality, many people worry intensely and incessantly. And they have got a great deal to worry about. I for one definitely fear for my life: I fear that most of it will be wasted, as will be the lives of most other people, doing some work that they won’t really enjoy doing, merely in order to make a living, after forty or so years of which the machinery of economy will discard them like so many worthless worn-out old husks. This makes life pointless and the people who realize this cannot avoid being driven to alienation and despair. Some are desperate enough to start setting fires to buildings once they realize that this is the absolute maximum they are likely to ever get out of life, while others content ourselves with merely posting silly and overly long-winded comments on other people’s blogs. But that is only a difference of degree, not of principle.

    There is nothing alarming happening at the moment? Really? I for one find very many highly alarming things in the world around me: decreasing quality of life due to pressures related to globalization (and the increasing and all-prevading precariousness of most people’s lives, and the attendant decay and disintegration of the fabric of society), the ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor, the increasingly worse environmental degradation and the resulting risk of natural calamities, outbreaks of diseases, etc. These are very real and alarming problems, many of which are already making themselves keenly felt, and are likely to grow even worse in the future.

    You say that we have everything at our disposal. But in truth the source of all our problems is precisely the fact that we don’t have everything at our disposal. If we did, we wouldn’t have to work and we wouldn’t have to worry and we could spend our time doing enjoyable things and being pleasant to each other and generally behaving like decent and civilized people; we wouldn’t have to set fires to buildings for fun, because there would be so many other more enjoyable things that we would be able to do. That’s why you rarely see rich people setting fires to buildings. In fact all the problems of any society stem from the need for its members to compete for limited resources.

    You blame the people for being obsessed with material properties and not paying attention to the culture. But the fact of the matter is that they cannot afford to pay attention to the culture. A typical person returns from his or her day’s work of inane soul-crushing boredom and pointlessness in a state of mental numbness which makes him or her entirely unable to appreciate, contemplate, or even simply enjoy, cultural goods. This is why they resort to material goods instead: because these are the only ones stlil accessible to them. To be able to interact meaningfully with cultural goods requires a lively, responsive, curious, independent, even creative mind; which is of course entirely incompatible with being a mindless cogwheel in the corporate machinery, such as most people are nowadays. To blame them for their materialism is as silly and as unfair as to blame a man for being unable to see after his eyes have been gouged out, or for being unable to walk after his legs have been amputated.


Vpišite komentar

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.