turning the other cheek: the refuge of the weak and powerless?

[Mortos]

I read this on a blog. The blog is: http://thinkandobsessoutloud.blogspot.com/

as a proud and pugnacious left-winger, it irritates me whenever i hear someone exhort the value of "taking the high road", and being polite and respectful at all times. people like that seem to think that the only answer to injustice is to turn the other cheek, because virtue is its own reward. personally, i just think that's horseshit.

justice will never happen if the opressed are too cowed to fight back. jesus said that the meek will inherit the earth, but as far as i can see, meekness contributes to slavery and/or extinction. power is not given, it is taken--politeness isn't even in the equation. after all, what slave thinks that a master will just one day grow a conscience and be guilt-tripped into granting them their freedom?

so when did "turning the other cheek" and "taking the high road" become a virtue? when someone fucks you over and you don't fight back, how is that virtuous? when a man hits his wife and she won't press charges, is that something she should tout to others as an example of her moral purity? or is that really more an example of her being powerless and being unable to demand respect and human decency? since when was compliant shit-eating an indication of strong moral fiber?

many conservatives like to wag their fingers at people like me, telling me what a hypocrite i am because i'm not "polite" and "peaceful". just because i object to being used as cannon fodder for bush's oil war doesn't mean that i cannot have a spine. just because i believe in being nice to people doesn't mean i won't be a bitch to people who are dicks to me. liberal doesn't mean "anti-retaliation", after all. where in the dictionary does it say that left-winger means "pushover"?

it serves conservatives to think of liberals as a bunch of spineless hacks who jump whenever they say boo(!). and some liberals and almost all moderates buy into this garbage as well. when will they learn that no one respects people with clay feet?

with the election coming up, kerry's timidity in attacking bush is especially infuriating to me. i mean, h'es running against the guy! he's not supposed to be nice to him! i hope he doesn't pull an al gore at the debates, where he agrees with bush almost 37 times. kerry needs to be tough, and as far as i'm concerned, rolling over to bush does not a tough man make. he wants to be seen as a tough guy? then he needs to start drawing blood from the bush campaign. after all, how can i trust a guy to defend my best interests if he can't even defend himself?

[papau]

1. I renewed my carry permit and am keeping my guns - despite

family thought that old folks should not have guns.

Indeed, the option that the right has always claimed is obviously available to the "proud and pugnacious left-winger" left.

But there will be no announcement of someone giving up on the US version of Democracy because of Rich folks control of media and GOP and Gov. It will just happen. And there is no point to discussing violence. In the 60's SDS in 63 would have been shocked by anyone thinking violence - yet in 67-68 the SDS gave birth to the weathermen. It should be noted that the weathermen accomplished nothing -

But I am just talking about folks reactions to an unfair game.

As to Kerry - he is fighting back - but the media gives him about zero time. Today his speech on Bush incompetence was reported as Kerry criticizes Bush followed by 90 seconds of Bush saying how bad Kerry is.

It is the media - our wonderful - not controlled by the right wing GOP - they just act that way - media.

[pllib]

2. turning the other cheek = civil disobedience

Don't underestimate the radicalism of Jesus. Turning your cheek to a person in ancient Israel was an act of defiance. Jesus was, in essence, advocating for radical, but active, non-violent civil disobedience, in the vein of Gandhi and MLK. Don;t mistake non-violence for passivity - it is anything but.