Antagonism

dictionary with letter A

Antagonism: (n.) active hostility or opposition.

We just can’t make up our minds.

Are human beings supposed to be angry or are we supposed to quell our feelings, disguising them as mellow cooperation?

We are confused.

Sometimes we criticize ourselves for having any temper whatsoever, while simultaneously applauding heroes in movies who take vengeance on their enemies.

Which one is it?

Honestly, the only way to deal with antagonism is to never allow it to get that far.

How does it digress? When we refuse to admit that we’re pissed off.

By the time we finish struggling over the validity of our feelings we are so exasperated, exhausted and infuriated that we pop off with something we shouldn’t say or do something beyond the pale.

If true spirituality were correctly imparted to believers, we would comprehend that the key to controlling our anger is releasing it in tiny doses as it rises to the surface.

As the Good Book tells us, we should not let the sun set on our anger. We should be angry and sin not. For after all, what generates sin is violence.

And the Good Book also tells us that we should never allow ourselves to ignore our apprehensions to the point that we start calling people names and destroying their reputation.

Antagonism is a social disease created by a civilized society caught between the reality of human frustration and the aspiration to keep peace and quiet.

As long as people shall dwell together, there will be conflict.

Having a healthy debate or even a livid argument is preferable to shooting a missile up someone’s backside.

 

 

Donate Button

Thank you for enjoying Words from Dic(tionary) —  J.R. Practix

Advertisements

AK-47

Words from Dic(tionary)

dictionary with letter A

AK-47: (n) a type of assault rifle, originally manufactured in the Soviet Union.

It’s a big gun. That’s what I know.

I’ve never fired one of those. I have used a shotgun. That was pretty impressive.

Impressive… What do I mean by that?

I think guns are fascinating. Otherwise we wouldn’t want to play with them as children. After all, nobody wants a squirt-monkey or a squirt-hose. No, it’s a squirt-gun.

Being able to point something at somebody and dispel ammunition–even if it’s just water–is pretty thrilling. But you see, that’s the problem.

Somewhere along the line–at about the age of eleven or twelve–the bullets change from H2O to a helluva lot more deadly.

When would I want a gun?

  • If I were in the wilderness and a bear was getting ready to attack me, I think I would rather have a gun than a bow and arrow.
  • I guess if I was trapped on a desert island and was trying to track down game, using a bullet might be more effective than setting traps or throwing rocks.
  • I think if we’re going to insist on having wars, we should give our soldiers weapons to match the enemy’s, or be prepared to be enslaved by being “out-gunned.”

But I just don’t believe that guns are the answer to everything. It’s like so many other things in our society–the solutions we come up with seem to create their own dilemmas instead of alleviating conflict.

Putting a gun into the hands of a common man who, at this moment, is rational, does not mean that this person will be logical under the influence of alcohol, anger, frustration, or just dumb stupidity.

I guess what bothers me is the idea that law-abiding citizens require guns to protect themselves from non-law-abiding citizens. It begs the questions:

  1. When should I pull a trigger and release a missile of death to terminate the life of another human being?
  2. Should I do it because they have entered my home to steal from me?
  3. Should I shoot them because they are walking on my sidewalk, speaking threats in the direction of my domicile?
  4. In my frivolous and often unpredictable nature, should I be trusted to decide who lives or dies simply because I have a weapon to determine the outcome?
  5. Or are all these questions moot–because we have a Constitution that allows us to be “gun-toting,” so that’s all the justification we need?

There’s no doubt–guns are cool. I would be greatly fascinated to look at someone’s gun collection. I just wonder how we can determine how these weapons are used, or … how we can trust one another to make that decision.

 

ABM

by J. R. Practix

dictionary with letter A

ABM: abbr. anti-ballistic missile.

I’m in favor of that.

Normally, I wouldn’t call myself an “anti” person. But if we were taking a vote on ballistic missiles, I would have no trouble in joining the camp of those who would be against them.

There’s nothing positive about a ballistic missile. If you fired one at someone else, even the most hard-hearted individual would have to consider that human life was being destroyed–not even to mention tainting the land, which you would soon occupy through your conquering.

On the other hand, if someone’s fired a ballistic missile YOUR way, reasons for regret and dismay may be obvious.

One would think that the natural inclination would be to fall into the category of ant- ballistic missile. Isn’t it interesting, though, that the only way we have found to overcome the stupidity of creating a ballistic missile is by inventing another missile, which is shot into the air to prevent the first missile from hitting its target–by making the missile shot off first a new target?

Wouldn’t it just be easier to get RID of the ballistic missiles, instead of spending millions and millions of dollars to come up with a way to inhibit the dastardly original monster?

So let me get this straight–if someone shoots a ballistic missile at me, I now have a missile which I call an ABM, to shoot at their missile. Doesn’t that just open the door for an AABM? An anti-anti-ballistic missile, which is shot off simultaneously WITH the ballistic missile, to hit the anti-ballistic missile, so that the ballistic missile can pursue its mission of destruction?

And we wonder why politics and governments are constantly in turmoil of meaningless and confusing rhetoric. After all, if you are not willing to admit that the original idea of a ballistic missile needs to be eliminated, then you will spend your time constantly coming up with new “anti” plans to outdo your previous “anti” efforts.

Back to the original thought: if  we’re taking a vote–I’m anti-ballistic missile.