focused power play/dance?
Lets see how this can be s/pan out..
I caught myself feeling/sensing something rather childish/infantile. With a new struggle between the russian federation and “the west”/usa, i sensed a with for “the West” to “win”.
Why? When did this come about and How??!!
Are they not all as anti free & fearless processes, attempting to control evolution, as each other?
Here is a telling piece on rt. russian/kremlin mouth-tool is saying something like Hey West! You guys were meddling with ukranian politics for ages – how hypocrite of you to cry foul now you seem to lose!!
However that is where the golden egg might lay..
The russians here, by claiming they have the right to do as the west become as hypocritical as the western powers they simply seem to mimic. Because instead of offering a critique and an attempt to learn how to do different, they offer a “me too” approach that is anything but subtle, or offers a seeming critique – as soviet communism did – on how to do power. Hence, foregoing pretence and acting in an even more brutish way is not a reason for doing stuff.
More over, the kremlin’s activities, seem more top-down and orchestrated than the west. While it might be true that the west was/is interfering, the way is after an initial local action. Following the activities and supporting – rather than directing them. (eg, unlike how the us/uk operated in iran during the 50’s to overthrow Mossadeque, bring in the Sha and create a rift that still reverberates..)
The top-down, me too, me now, if you can – don’t tell me No, coupled with brutality and self generated hypocricities made of the power imitation – double standards operates, so i can do that too – and a specific hypocrisy with the situation that says:
i can be as uber nationalistic as i like, complain the ukrainian new authorities are fascistically nationalists and dismiss any talk/move by anyone attempting to support groups in my dominion – national groups such as chechens, gender (gay) or artistic (pussy riots) – as interfering with My internal affairs.
It seems to me that perhaps there is a simpler way to put the above, and it might be a spacetime acceptable for a brief critique of the good, the bad & the ugly’s political aesthetics..(??)
By aesthetics, I refer to senses. Sensing, for example, that despite the “good” being a murderer and power abusing individual, it will feel rather “good” if he killed the “bad”. That sense is also a political one, in a way that I think it operates in justifying – perhaps even perpetuating – power beyond the mental arguments, by the ugliness of nitty-gritty life. In that way, the “ugly” character is always sort of a witness to the “good” & “bad” battle. The “ugly” is you and me, each one of us.
The ugly wants to be an equal to its good/bad gods of power. Hence, like them, is searching for the gold. However, because of Ugly’s very thirst for power, when its within reach, its lost because Ugly doesn’t know How to use power. Power is not for Ugly, hence he needs to decide who to align with. Aligning with the blonde murderer/killer seems preferable to the dark murderer because the blonde will not beat out the gold’s location, just let time do its thing. The blonde will not be cruel to other characters, unless needed (“sorry Shorty” – to survive) – unlike the dark killer’s wallowing in the joys of power.
In fact, it can be argued that the very “badness” of the Bad is in the reluctance/avoidance from allowing other elements around to invest power in him. As if he is afraid that power will be yanked out of him. That very fear makes the character very human, but also prevents him from allowing others around to have their own movements & rhythms. The fear drives him to impose his will, rather than allow others to recognise and use his will in their ways/time. That characteristic makes him humanly fallible, but instead of humanly confronting the fear, he is afraid this will live him exposed – so unlike Ugly, he hides the fear. That very sequence inflicts damage on his ability to be malevolent when power comes about, hence in proficiency handling power. The in-proficiency of keeping power, coupled with a jealousy to the blonde character who is simply afraid of others and trying to survive – rather than dealing with all these dark internal forces – makes the dark character “bad”.
Perhaps ironically, like Lenin’s version of communism that, unlike Marx’s, had the top-down and do it Now approach, today’s rulers of russia, unlike their western counter parts, abuse their power with impatience. Power abuse with the wrong rhythm and wrong time will land any composer in a pretty nasty spot, no..?
The blonde killer, like the dark one, seeks power. However, free from the dark internal conflicts, the blonde is able to question his usage of power. This questioning, the ability to be unfavourable through taking himself as a temporary being, one that will probably survive, but might die – as inevitably will – makes him fit for power and excuses the abuses he inflicts at times. eg the Bad knows its useless spending efforts beating the information out of the Good, because the Good’s life is not the be all and end all in Blond’s eyes. Or that power keeping is acknowledged as justified at the end of the film because the Ugly – you and me – acknowledges, in effect that despite the abuse, he can understand Why it was done. Hence the blonde is a son of a bitch, nothing sinister..
The blonde, in a sense, used his power for self survival protection – something the Ugly understands innately, would do if he could, but feels frastrated because he can not get the freedom to choose – only to select options given by others.
The blonde, having paid his taxes to society, Ugly, feels now free to roam without any moral weight. A weight he needs to keep off because it keeps him being “good” and away from the disabling darkness “bad” has..
However the amount of taxes, and how they got paid, was of course a choice for the blonde murderer to make..
Following these kind of sensations from the good the bad & the ugly, perhaps it can be argued that if the russians were more relaxed about the powers they have and less brutal with and about it – they’d get much more than the Crimea..
Maybe its also a case of letting – not making – people forgive some of the russian made past transgressions. Such forgiveness – not foprgetfullness – can ensure even the kremlin gets rid some of its disabling demons?
Once a hub of the Golden-Hoard’s rule in europe, perhaps contemporary imperial powers usage and legitimation of brutality is exemplified/iconised in the little black sea peninsula..
Perhaps this provides a challenging chance for the rest of us to leave them there to do their epic battles and dance into futility, by looking in the mirror, smile and recognise we don’t look half as ugly as sometimes we might feel..? 😉
Well.. Just an idea.. 🙂