Obsessive Fantasies of Defeating an Enemy

Well, the problem, the problem I said, is I have obsessive fantasies of defeating our enemy; always thinking about it, always hoping it will happen, I have no time to think about anything else.

-It seems to me you have plenty of time.  I don’t think that’s your problem.

-Well, maybe it’s not, but it’s a problem; maybe the problem is that I am full of fear, fear of defeat and failure; what if we don’t defeat him.

-Time defeats all enemies. You know that.  I don’t think that’s your problem.

-Well maybe the problem is that when you say that to me I think you’re my enemy.  If you’re not with me in my fight against my enemy, you must be on the other side.

-Really?  You don’t acknowledge lots of people are useful idiots and bystanders and just part of the scenery?  Really?  That’s a lot of people’s problems friend — awful pathetic violent people. Just not yours.

-Fine, fine, if you know so well, what is my problem?  It’s hard to say isn’t it, what with the perpetual distractions we read on twitter, one steps forward and a million steps back, and everywhere we look the enemy’ face now pompous, now grinning, now sly, now stupid, filling my attention every moment, forcing me to check on him when I wake up and when I go to sleep.  What is my problem Mr. Smart Guy if it’s so easy to say?

-Your problem is you are afraid if there were no enemy making you think about him you’d have to decide what else to think about.

-You really are my enemy!



4 thoughts on “Obsessive Fantasies of Defeating an Enemy

  1. Ah, of Don Quixote and windmills, Drunky McFisty looking for a pointless scrap at the bar, and vain men who seek any cause to champion for the sake of simply championing any cause. When we reach the point in which war no longer serves a purpose, war becomes an end to itself. We do not seek positive conflict for a positive end, rather we see all conflict as positive, because we love conflict in and of itself. And, how can any man make a fight without an enemy?

    We know these men at the very moment they have defeated all their real enemies, beaten their rivals, won the day and their causes, and after enjoying the moment of victory but for a second, they find they have no enemies left to fight, but only want to fight, so then begin to make enemies where he had none, turn friends and allies into opposing forces, he creates vast conspiracies in his mind, creates opposition where there is none. His enemy is peace, something he fights with, every day, throughout.

    Many men love their drama, their conflict, their fighting, so much, they deny themselves the great state of peace. Like any other negative thing he can hold onto, and fights to keep clutching onto, he cannot be made to let go ( I suppose fighting someone to stop them fighting is ironic), and he obsesses so much that no matter how much it harms him, he will protect it under almost any circumstance. he cannot be convinced, because he does not desire to be talked out of it.

    He is the man who has little to nothing to gain if he wins; he has lost his beloved battle, his beloved conflict, his beloved struggle, he ironically lost the very thing he fought for, in the war itself. Best let him fight the fight forever, without winning, so that he does not get bored and start just another war with just something else.

    The great motivator and distraction. A weapon such as I is gravitated to shows and games of violence, but the men opposite are no different, the dramatist too relies on enemies to create conflict and thus drama. They, too, must find and defeat enemies, create struggles, romanticize the good and bad, the desperate need to create “our side” and to passionately rally and defend it, and to defeat those awful men who oppose them. Although it is soft conflict, no violence, it is still conflict, it is still pitting the us against the them. They still need to create bad guys, create the other side, make the opposition exist just to fight it. Nobody wants to watch the show about the functional family with no problems, the office full of happy co workers, or Superman frying eggs and taking a nap on his day off from the Daily Planet.

    Alexander the Great wept when he conquered his final lands because he had nothing left to conquer. His plight is that of many.

  2. It’s a puzzle! The ancients said there were two principles: love and strife,and they were perpetually at war, love seeking to combine things and strife seeking to break them apart. But that’s just how strife would put it! Love would say that even breaking things apart is how things ultimately get recombined. So there would only be one principle: love. Me, I don’t know!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s