You Can’t Make Me
Every day we are bombarded with restrictions on what we should or should not say. We are told what we should own or not own. We are told how we should or should not live. I and millions of others tend to think about where you should place your restrictions. Every day has become a headache trying to decipher what is and is not acceptable anymore.
Recently, I read a story where one generation was telling another to stop posing for pictures a certain way because we are now supposed to stand like this. I personally dislike having my picture taken, but I thought I just may pose in various rock star-style poses representing the attitude of Generation X, but we cannot publish those because we were generally flipping the camera the bird.
But I digress as I reminisce about a time when people had a sense of humor, were not easily hurt over every word or gesture, and no one wanted to cancel you over trivial nonsense. Cancel you… what an ominous phrase. The classic television show Twilight Zone aired an episode titled ‘The Obsolete Man.’ The State (a totalitarian society) “cancels” ‘obsolete’ citizens by terminating their existence. A slippery slope if one must say.
Today only one narrative is acceptable, and if a person, or group of people, deviate from the narrative, they are chained with numerous adjectives to describe their low stature among the populace. If you support the second amendment to the United States Constitution you are labeled a radical extremist who needs to remove some form of privilege and retire the red ballcap.
Currently, legislators are busy at the New Mexico Round House in Santa Fe. One of the busy participants is Kim Chaves Cook, Law Office of the Public Defender (LOPD). On February 10 the Albuquerque Journal ran an article entitled “Talk of the Town: Existing laws prohibit firearms during drug deals” written by Ms. Cook explaining her quote “...I think we all know that the presence of a firearm is often quote-unquote necessary for these folks in these situations to protect themselves because it is an inherently dangerous environment to be involved in a drug transaction.” She claims it was a distortion of her original message and that we need to stop with sound bites, but is that not what politics has been reduced to, sound bites? What she said was careless regardless of the message proceeding and preceding the quote above, where is the cancel crew looking to disassemble Ms. Cook?
We are responsible for the words we used and actions we take. Now Ms. Cook is upset at the media for reporting what she said. She fires back that it is unfair for negative reporting when she was the originator of the quote. Yet, if the same quote was stated by a colleague across the aisle screams of censure, removal from committees, and talks of stepping down would reverberate throughout the chamber.
I am not affiliated with either major political party. I am Libertarian and carry a centrist belief in live and let live. During a class discussion on U.S. Government, I told my senior students that they would not see me march at a Pride Rally, but they also would not see me running across the street to demonstrate against them. I have my convictions concerning societal constructs, but I also realize I am not the judge, jury, and executioner residing over moral standings. I am entitled, like those across from me, to feel the way I do and believe how I want to believe.
I never attempt to force people to believe the way I do, and I am not fond of looking down on others for their beliefs– whatever those beliefs may be. I am just not a subscriber to radical ideologies from either side. I cannot envision Jesus directing people to perform violent acts against people and buildings, and I cannot fathom Martin Luther King Jr. asking people to set fires, overturn cars, or beat up people.
Forced compliance results in resistance and turns a movement into a laughable circus. No one should be made to feel inferior because of how they believe or are harangued for disagreeing with another person’s point of view. Does this truly help your cause? Will forced actions cause opposite effects over time?
One person cannot condemn another and state they are obsolete because they choose not to subscribe to a particular set of values. This is a dangerous path. What happened in the episode of the “Obsolete Man?’ The State representative who condemned another because he was considered obsolete became obsolete himself.
I always tell my son he can be whatever he wants if he does not hurt himself or others. If you truly love those who cross your path, you will respect them/him/her/zim/they/zey or however, they see themselves.
Civility is quickly dying. Human interactions are cold and people are becoming more selfish. I smile when I look at old photographs without passe poses and duck lip kisses. I refuse to be part of this new culture where everything is offensive and words need to be modified because it harms the senses. I am not stating I will run out to the nearest department store, get on the loudspeaker, and start shouting out derogatory remarks or profanity or slurs, but I should not be told I cannot call my big bedroom the “master bedroom” because of unfortunate circumstances from two hundred years ago. This idea is as antiquated as the time that passed which created such anger and bitterness. Does it somehow make it better?
Everyone should be mindful of the words we use. However, it should never come to a point where people are afraid to speak, own something, or feel a particular way. We are not robotic or animatronics to be controlled. Technology today captures a moment and places it on repeat. Within minutes your statement has gone viral and put into an infinite loop. Remember, the mirror stares back hard.
I have been involved in politics and government for over 20 years. Two things I have learned are less is more, and the more you know the less you let others know what you know. Just give out parts and pieces relevant to the topic. Everything you say or write can and will be used against you by a jury of your peers.