To say that this is a very strange time is the understatement of the age. The degree of pot-stirring in previously untouchable subject matter is both mind-boggling and jaw-dropping. It is totally cringe-worthy!
And as much as I would like all the world-wide chaos to settle down, and for the world to be a calmer, more enjoyable living environment for all of us, I also think I understand part of the necessity that it is the way it presently seems.
I wasn’t kidding earlier about the disruptive and penetrating energies coming in now being similar to lake turn-over in my post of “Upside-down and Sideways.” Energetically that’s what this really is—a time of skuzzy-bottom content rising to the surface for purification and clearing—which is neither pretty nor pleasant for anyone; especially for the fish—with which we now have a much closer association.
The Paris terrorism situation has created a reactionary back-lash that now resembles bait-the-bear. And you know what happens when you entice the bear with a juicy morsel tied to a nearby tree? Sure. The bear can’t resist the tasty temptation, and it becomes an easier target to catch/kill. I understand that part. But I have a few questions, as well.
Is this nasty situation creating over-reactions on both sides of the free-speech, “no subject is off-limits” issue? Yes.
Is this “cover-as-bait” really a calculated tactic that only time will show whether or not is effective in drawing terror cells out of hiding to “avenge” the perceived publicized insult?
Was that the Charlie Hebdo editorial staff’s main intention with the latest cover art—to draw out the terror cells that still might be hiding nearby? Hmmm…..I don’t think so.
I think they were just standing up strongly for freedom of speech, which is their right, as it is anyone’s right to decide their own beliefs and opinions. You don’t cower to a bully—you face them down at the start, or you will be constantly cowering ever afterwards. That is what I think the magazine’s staff were doing—just taking a very strong stand for their own freedom of speech. How their actions were perceived, is up to individual interpretation.
Did the Pope need to chime in with his two-cents worth on punching someone who might be insulting his mother or his religion? No. But he did. Talk about mixed messages in that little media exchange…. “violence is never acceptable—but I’d punch you if you insult my mother or religion.”
So where does that leave the rest of us who are on the sidelines, watching this mess unfold as it is likely going to unfold—violently, gruesomely, and chaotically in nations, states, and cities world-wide? Yes, we are simply shaking our heads and expecting the worst, but all hoping that this world society grows up sometime soon and stops taking itself so seriously. It’s like living through adolescence all over again.
On the other hand, that same energetic lake turn-over effect that throws everything into chaos also brings the forbidden subjects to the forefront of public attention to see whether there really is a smoldering fire within them, or just a lingering, still-smoky, half-wet pile of leaves there that hasn’t yet burned through all the combustible material.
It is loudly emphasizing the basic questions of what makes any religion the basis of a deeply-held belief; and are the religious beliefs/doctrines justifiable if they pit one group of people against other groups of people?
I would expect these issues and subjects will become mainstream topics for the next year or so, as we will likely have more opportunities to examine their reactors’/detractors’ actions and reactions to the on-going saga.
Personally, I request for someone to PLEASE show Alice the way out of this never-ending rabbit-hole, or at least please nudge her awake. The Red Queen is getting a bit out of hand here.