(no subject)
May. 20th, 2009 07:16 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
"So, you came here to testify in support of your friend. That's very good of you, sir. Yes, we can use all the information you can provide. Now you said here...let me see...ah, yes, you said that he used to go to these meetings every week in college, is that right? Yes. But they're not that kind of meetings. Uh, how would you know that, sir? Were you in the habit of attending these meetings as well? No? But he told you about them. All about them? Can you be sure he told you everything? Oh come now, sir, I don't see how you can state something like that when you are on oath. Surely he didn't tell you everything. Did he tell you how many people were there? Which way the seats were arranged? What time it was when the first speaker mounted the podium? Well, then it's obvious he kept some things from you, isn't it? And if you think about it, he probably intended it for the best. I mean, he must have known he was doing something wrong, or he would have confided in you more fully, but the fact that he didn't try to involve you in this traitorous activity will be noted in his defence.
"You say he's not a traitor? Are you calling these other witnesses liars, sir? I should hope not. They, after all, like you, are under oath. Now they say that he attended these political meetings, meetings which we happen to know are connected with organisations that keep in covert contact with the enemy. That doesn't sound like the action of a patriot to me, sir. You did say he said he 'enjoyed' them, didn't you? I have the record of your testimony here. Yes, that is the word. Now what kind of person, would you say, 'enjoys' a meeting in which a bunch of people stand up and talk down our country, make it sound like we're the bad guys? What kind of person could 'enjoy' listening to his country's name being dragged through the dirt? Well, let's leave that for the moment.
"Now, I have a transcript of a conversation here...yes, a conversation that took place two weeks ago in your workplace. And I believe you made some comment about your friend's work here, and he said 'well, it's good enough for government work.' 'Good enough for government work.' And I believe the next sound on the tape is the two of you laughing. Do you by any chance remember that conversation, sir? Oh, surely you must, it was only two weeks ago. If you can't remember something that happened two weeks ago, how can you expect us to accept your testimony about what your friend did in college? Oh, you do remember. Good, good. Now, that phrase...'good enough for government work'...doesn't that really mean that government work, it doesn't matter if it's good? It's okay if it's just fair? Maybe it's okay even if it isn't good. Maybe it's okay not to do it at all. It's okay to cheat the government, is that what that phrase means? It's okay to shortchange your country. A joke? Yes, I'm sure among the circles in which your friend moves it might be seen as a joke, sir, but we are engaged in serious business here. These phrases, these jokes, reveal a very serious problem in this country today, sir, a problem of treason and sedition and enemies within gnawing at the very fabric of our nation. Any citizen who is not prepared to give the government his very best at all times, not prepared to give one hundred and ten per cent every day, that citizen is a traitor, wouldn't you say, sir? I didn't catch that, sir. All right, let's move on.
"You visit your friend quite often, don't you, sir? So I expect you've seen all over his house, right? We men do love to show off our possessions. Have you ever seen a flag of our country in his house? No? Don't you think that's a little odd? I mean, you can get them all over the place, they turn up on mugs, beer mats, everything. I would have thought it would be quite hard to avoid having at least one. Not one single one? What kind of person do you think takes such excessive care to avoid having one single image of our flag in his possession? I beg your pardon, sir? There was one? Rolled up in his garage. That's not very respectful, is it? That's not what a flag is for. It sounds almost as if he was ashamed of it. What kind of person is ashamed of his country's flag, sir? What kind of person is ashamed to be a citizen of this great nation? What kind of person goes to meetings where traitors malign this country? Did you know that this man has never fought for his country? Never volunteered for enlistment in any armed force. What kind of man is afraid to fight for his country? Or maybe it's because he hates his country, wouldn't you say, sir? The evidence is piling up, isn't it, sir? Seditious meetings. Hates our flag. Refuses to fight for his country. And you still maintain that this man, this friend of yours, is not a filthy sneaking traitor? I wonder why you would say that?"
And outside, in the lobby, during recess...
"It was really stupid of that guy to try and stick up for him."
"Yes, it makes you wonder if he's not one too."
"Thank God these bastards are finally getting dragged out into the open."
"Say, do you have a flag in the house?"
"What? Oh, yes. Three. Four. Excuse me, I've just remembered something I have to do."
There is Us and there is Them.
To be Us, you must be against Them.
If you are not against Them, you cannot be Us. Therefore you are Them.
If you do not say you are against Them often enough, you are not against Them. Therefore you are Them.
One way to prove you are Us is to discover one of Them among Us and expose the impostor.
"Them" becomes redefined to mean "anyone who does not do enough to prove s/he is not Them."
"Them" becomes vast and shapeless, insidious and malign, while "Us" becomes a tiny beleaguered minority.
That feels good to some people.
Pick someone off the street. Find some pretext to denounce them (there'll be one). Anyone who defends them is guilty too, and you are a hero.
It's what humans do best.
"You say he's not a traitor? Are you calling these other witnesses liars, sir? I should hope not. They, after all, like you, are under oath. Now they say that he attended these political meetings, meetings which we happen to know are connected with organisations that keep in covert contact with the enemy. That doesn't sound like the action of a patriot to me, sir. You did say he said he 'enjoyed' them, didn't you? I have the record of your testimony here. Yes, that is the word. Now what kind of person, would you say, 'enjoys' a meeting in which a bunch of people stand up and talk down our country, make it sound like we're the bad guys? What kind of person could 'enjoy' listening to his country's name being dragged through the dirt? Well, let's leave that for the moment.
"Now, I have a transcript of a conversation here...yes, a conversation that took place two weeks ago in your workplace. And I believe you made some comment about your friend's work here, and he said 'well, it's good enough for government work.' 'Good enough for government work.' And I believe the next sound on the tape is the two of you laughing. Do you by any chance remember that conversation, sir? Oh, surely you must, it was only two weeks ago. If you can't remember something that happened two weeks ago, how can you expect us to accept your testimony about what your friend did in college? Oh, you do remember. Good, good. Now, that phrase...'good enough for government work'...doesn't that really mean that government work, it doesn't matter if it's good? It's okay if it's just fair? Maybe it's okay even if it isn't good. Maybe it's okay not to do it at all. It's okay to cheat the government, is that what that phrase means? It's okay to shortchange your country. A joke? Yes, I'm sure among the circles in which your friend moves it might be seen as a joke, sir, but we are engaged in serious business here. These phrases, these jokes, reveal a very serious problem in this country today, sir, a problem of treason and sedition and enemies within gnawing at the very fabric of our nation. Any citizen who is not prepared to give the government his very best at all times, not prepared to give one hundred and ten per cent every day, that citizen is a traitor, wouldn't you say, sir? I didn't catch that, sir. All right, let's move on.
"You visit your friend quite often, don't you, sir? So I expect you've seen all over his house, right? We men do love to show off our possessions. Have you ever seen a flag of our country in his house? No? Don't you think that's a little odd? I mean, you can get them all over the place, they turn up on mugs, beer mats, everything. I would have thought it would be quite hard to avoid having at least one. Not one single one? What kind of person do you think takes such excessive care to avoid having one single image of our flag in his possession? I beg your pardon, sir? There was one? Rolled up in his garage. That's not very respectful, is it? That's not what a flag is for. It sounds almost as if he was ashamed of it. What kind of person is ashamed of his country's flag, sir? What kind of person is ashamed to be a citizen of this great nation? What kind of person goes to meetings where traitors malign this country? Did you know that this man has never fought for his country? Never volunteered for enlistment in any armed force. What kind of man is afraid to fight for his country? Or maybe it's because he hates his country, wouldn't you say, sir? The evidence is piling up, isn't it, sir? Seditious meetings. Hates our flag. Refuses to fight for his country. And you still maintain that this man, this friend of yours, is not a filthy sneaking traitor? I wonder why you would say that?"
And outside, in the lobby, during recess...
"It was really stupid of that guy to try and stick up for him."
"Yes, it makes you wonder if he's not one too."
"Thank God these bastards are finally getting dragged out into the open."
"Say, do you have a flag in the house?"
"What? Oh, yes. Three. Four. Excuse me, I've just remembered something I have to do."
There is Us and there is Them.
To be Us, you must be against Them.
If you are not against Them, you cannot be Us. Therefore you are Them.
If you do not say you are against Them often enough, you are not against Them. Therefore you are Them.
One way to prove you are Us is to discover one of Them among Us and expose the impostor.
"Them" becomes redefined to mean "anyone who does not do enough to prove s/he is not Them."
"Them" becomes vast and shapeless, insidious and malign, while "Us" becomes a tiny beleaguered minority.
That feels good to some people.
Pick someone off the street. Find some pretext to denounce them (there'll be one). Anyone who defends them is guilty too, and you are a hero.
It's what humans do best.
Sorry, but ...
Date: 2009-05-20 08:12 am (UTC)I know it's wresting one specific quote into the straitjacket of a generalised, and politicised, programme, but it is there.
I believe it was the Doctor who diagnosed the Dalek ethic as "dislike of the un-like" -- anything that isn't "us" is an axiomatic enemy. And one thing which human history points to, is that any community needs (or feels it needs) an "enemy" against which to unite.
Re: Sorry, but ...
Date: 2009-05-20 08:23 am (UTC)What amazes me is the sophistication humans bring to both defining what they regard as "un-like" and telling themselves that they're doing it for some ultimate good.
Re: Sorry, but ...
Date: 2009-05-20 08:24 am (UTC)For he that is not against us is for us. (ASV)
Re: Sorry, but ...
Date: 2009-05-20 08:26 am (UTC)Re: Sorry, but ...
Date: 2009-05-20 08:27 am (UTC)Re: Sorry, but ...
Date: 2009-05-20 11:28 am (UTC)Re: Sorry, but ...
Date: 2009-05-20 01:28 pm (UTC)Although Soren's one does seem to be the one used by certain governments (the same way that they apparently read '1984' and thought it was an instruction manual)...
no subject
Date: 2009-05-20 01:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-20 01:34 pm (UTC)I do rather wonder what will happen to the 'us' when all of the 'them' have been put in prison. Will there be anyone left to unlock the prisons before they (sorry, "the us") die os starvation?
no subject
Date: 2009-05-20 05:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-21 02:34 am (UTC)Big Brother
Date: 2009-05-21 07:42 am (UTC)