Movie review: “300″

2007-04-01
By

Tonight, I went to the theater to see the movie “300,” a glorified account of the conflict between the Spartan city-state (in modern-day Greece) and Persian invaders, led by the Persian king Xerxes. The movie is about the battle of Thermopylae in 450 BC, in which 300 Spartans held off millions of invading Persian armies.

The movie depicts the harsh warrior culture of Sparta in glowing, glorified terms. Children are trained in combat “from the time they could stand,” and the movie depicts their fathers striking them with closed fists during intense bouts of training. No one seems reluctant to endure this suffering; ALL maddeningly embrace it. Boys are sent out into the wilderness in rags, armed with a spear, braving the ice and snow bear-chested and without so much as a shoe on their feet. I suppose to wear warm clothing would be a sign of shame, culturally-imposed by the glorious warrior culture.

Of course, the subtext behind this whole movie is that all this harsh living is necessary for the survival of the state against foreign invaders. Those who would demur in the face of such a threat would surely be called cowards, whether their motivation was cowardice or not. As the movie unfolds, it becomes immediately obvious that there is no room for tenderness, no longing for a life of peace, no enjoyment of one’s existence. There is only self-sacrifice, of boys and men, who must constantly prepare to pay the ultimate price in order to defend this culture of self-annihilation. But in the movie “300,” the headlong rush toward violent conflict is not depicted as a necessary evil, or even an evil at all. Death is depicted as glorious, so much so that the truly brave lust for death. This is not a movie that promotes bravery, but rather bravado. The value of each Spartan soldier is measured in terms of his lust for danger and death, for his willingness to pay for the country’s “freedom” through willing self-sacrifice. This is how men are portrayed: valuable if they hope for, run toward, and drink deeply of death.

The wife of the brave Spartan king is portrayed much differently. While he is off fighting a desperate struggle, she remains behind. Her burden is the sorrow she feels that her husband is away. Her parting words to him — as he departed from her for a hopeless battle — were, “Come back with your shield, or with your head on it.” Moviegoers are intended to respond to this display with stupefied admiration.

Our warrior hero is Sparta’s King Leonidas, now on the battlefield in a desperate struggle against overwhelming odds. His wife is Queen Gorgo. Left behind, Queen Gorgo is left with the task of summoning the country’s political leaders to send the full army to reinforce her husband’s tiny force of 300. The leader of this council is named Theron, a corrupt politician. He intimidates her with veiled threats to kill her son, then comes at night with a promise to lend her political support if she will submit to being raped by him. He tries to shame her by pointing out that her husband is defying Spartan law by deploying troops without authorization. He tries to shame her by comparing her comparatively comfortable existence with the gore her husband is swimming in. Taunting her, he asks her, “What do YOU have to offer?” She drops her clothes in response, turns around, and as he begins the rape, he tells her the encounter will “not be short, and it will not be pleasant.”

The next time we see Queen Gorgo and Theron together is in the presence of Sparta’s council. She makes a plea for the deployment of troops to assist her husband, a speech laced with platitudes about bravery and freedom. Theron, convinced that he “owns” the council (“I created it with my bare hands”), unexpectedly denounces the plan to save Queen Gorgo’s husband. In a spiteful tirade, he belittles and mocks her. Some in the council speak against him (“how dare you” insult the Queen), but he shames them into silence by pointing out their own corruption in the acceptance of bribes. Even the queen’s defenders lack moral value. As Theron’s tirade against the queen reaches a crescendo, he insults her honor by calling her a whore. The queen turns away, defeated, insulted, her honor in disarray. Suddenly she turns the tables and stabs Theron with a sword, the picture of female empowerment — saving her own hide despite the good intentions of her would-be saviors, the corrupt male politicians who were too impotent to defend her. As I watched this scene come to this climax, women sitting throughout the theater erupted into spontaneous applause. The queen’s honor had been avenged, and by the only one competent enough to avenge it: the queen.

Back on the battlefield, a disfigured and weak Spartan (who was rejected by King Leonidas as unfit for battle) lends his support to the Persian enemy in a display of revenge. The Persians take tactical advantage, and soon the 300 brave Spartan warriors are surrounded, then annihilated — including King Leonidas. The parting shot of our hero is of a man beaten, but brave — pinned to the ground with scores of arrows dug into his flesh. He dies in agony, but he dies bravely — a martyr — the epitome of what all Spartan men should aspire to become. A volley of thousands more arrows are launched at his twisted body as the camera fades out.

The lesson to be learned from this movie is subtle. Men are portrayed as valuable and noble not when they lust for life, but when they lust for death. The most honorable men are indeed the ones who die. Contrast this with the portrayal of Queen Gorgo. Her worth was her dignity, not her compulsion with self-sacrifice. Her worth was shown in her desire to live — despite the specter of rape, child molestation, and public humiliation. Her worth was shown in her empowerment to exact revenge against her male oppressor, despite having no one capable enough to risk themselves to save her. Her departing camera shot has standing in a majestic field, gazing off into the distance as her young son runs to her side. She is the mother, the nurturer, and the intact survivor. She has braved this battle, and despite her pain has prevailed. Not only this, but she has saved all of Sparta by convincing the male politicians that they are well-served in deciding to defend themselves.

The final shot of the movie is of a sea of tens of thousands of Spartan warriors, yelling battle cries in willing anticipation of the coming military threat. King Leonidas’ death, along with the deaths of the 300, had been the catalyst to convince the warrior culture to defend itself. This was, however, only possible when his wife made a speech.

If you can’t see the cheapening of human life in this movie — especially that of boys and men — and the glorification of males only in their embrace of self-demise, you are truly a part of the misandry generation.

35 views

  • Menck

    I haven’t seen the movie and frankly wasn’t sure I wanted to. But this cleared it up for me. I’d read a couple of reviews previously and there were some references to the character of of Queen Gorgo that rasied questions in my own mind. This confirms what I suspected i.e. “woman as TRUE hero” in a story involving men that sacrifice even their very lives in defense of the woman in question and all her lesser counterparts back in the home village. Typical Holloywood drivel.

    By the way, since I’ve gotten this to post, can anybody tell me how contact whoever the site administrator is for MND??? I am new here and keep getting my posts rejected by the site’s spam filter. This one just got lucky. Thanks in advance for anybody that helps.

  • Menck

    haven’t seen the movie and frankly wasn’t sure I wanted to. But this cleared it up for me. I’d read a couple of reviews previously and there were some references to the character of of Queen Gorgo that rasied questions in my own mind. This confirms what I suspected i.e. “woman as TRUE hero” in a story involving men that sacrifice even their very lives in defense of the woman in question and all her lesser counterparts back in the home village. Typical Holloywood drivel.

    By the way, since I’ve gotten this to post, can anybody tell me how contact whoever the site administrator is for MND??? I am new here and keep getting my posts rejected by the site’s spam filter. This one just got lucky. Thanks in advance for anybody that helps.

  • Menck

    haven’t seen the movie and frankly wasn’t sure I wanted to. But this cleared it up for me. I’d read a couple of reviews previously and there were some references to the character of of Queen Gorgo that rasied questions in my own mind. This confirms what I suspected i.e. “woman as TRUE hero” in a story involving men that sacrifice even their very lives in defense of the woman in question and all her lesser counterparts back in the home village. Typical Holloywood drivel.

    By the way, since I’ve gotten this to post, can anybody tell me how contact whoever the site administrator is for MND??? I am new here and keep getting my posts rejected by the site’s spam filter. This one just got lucky. Thanks in advance.

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    Thanks, John for a most excellent review.

    I haven’t seen the movie yet, just a few trailers and excerpts on ‘Talking Movies, but I can picture it clearly from your vivid description.

    While not wishing to detract in any way from your acute analysis, I think we could have guessed how the storyline would run, well before it was even shot.
    The ‘Goodies’ and ‘Baddies’ formula grows ever simpler as the attention-span of movie audiences gets shorter.

  • red pill

    JD:
    Life is cheap and it has always been. Not my decree, just observation over millenia. The only valuable lesson, the only laudable concept from this movie or others like it are from demostration of what happens when people stick to their principles and roles with respect to cultural and species survival without getting so lofty and erudite that nothing gets done and survival is not achieved.
    The only value of the film is to remind the multitude of fat, lazy accommodators that they live in a world of peril and potential extinction of their kind. Pastey little prisses go on and on about ‘rights’ for themselves and obligations of others so they can cower safley and snipe at others suggesting that they have any obligation to their kind. Of alll the leftsw blather the underlying sense of entitlement and irresponsibility stinks like week-old fish offal…

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    The 300′s obvious propaganda can be a bit hard to take.

    I can see why it is called war porn.

    The classical historians are of the universal opinion that Leonidas, like Davy Crocket in the Alamo and George Custer at Little Big Horn, found himself in a really bad spot with an overwhelming enemy force coming down on him.
    That in each case the defeat was turned into a propaganda victory and rallying cry is that is the only thing that can be done when a group of troops get annihilated.

    We appropriately honor our troops who fight for us in battle. But we prefer them to come home unhurt, and we do not wish to receive the flag folded in a triangle.

    Like General Patton said, we do not win a war by dying for our country, we win by making that poor bastard over there die for his country.

    And by making the enemy troops curse their leaders for putting them in such a bad spot!

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    Some very nice insight from Roger Knight.

    Extrapolate the formula to so-called ‘jihadis’ and sucide bombing. The propaganda is paramount. Victory in military terms is impossible, so a glorious death is the next best option.

    The power-hungry egomaniacs who incite such action are the same ‘pasty little prisses’ that ‘red pill’ describes. Their skin colour, religion and culture may be very different but they are brothers under the skin.

  • red pill

    Staking ones claim is important in the animal world (this includes humans) Some piss on a tree, some leave scat and some leave bodies behind either their own or their enemies. The Iranians for instance are willing to leave their bodies behind and claim victory and precedence while the British sailors in the current instance are not. What message did Leonidas send and what message did the Brits? Lofty erudite peeple may argue about merits pro and con, but the world is not peopled mostly by lofty erudite people, rather by average fairly simple people who allign themselves with the winner, WHOEVER that may be and are stirred and influenced by direct ACTION and not so much by whimpy words.
    Likey thousands of fence-sitters converted to a more radical form islam upon viewing the British response because they perceive the west and its deity to be impotent and the simple peeps want to side with a winner….

  • red pill

    Mal

    If someone has the power to impell one to destry themselves they are not the pasty little prisses I refer to. Produing a direct affirmative response to a threat, however perceived is not prissy. Sitting doing nothing but offering excuses of why nothing should be done and attempting to foil those that act as a leader is what I refer to. It is sophistry to assume that a general or other leader does nothing when sending others to fight. It is also sophistry to assume parity with a leader when one has neither the responsibility or power to create events. Americans now exhibit a particular form of comfortable megalomania assuming in their ignorance that they each can lead the nation to easy perfection while for the most part they individually can’t lead their own children to clean up their rooms…

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    “the world is not peopled mostly by lofty erudite people”
    Exactly.

    So the succesful manipulator must either:
    1. educate the ‘sheeple’ and let them make up their own minds.
    2. make sure their propaganda is perfectly suited to the target audence
    3. disguise progaganda as education

    1. Is dangerous because it will produce a few souls that can see through 2. and 3.
    2. Is mildly tricky because even ‘sheeple’ will finally realise that the propaganda and real life don’t match (Soviet Union?).
    3. Is the safest bet because it takes the ‘sheeple’ a long time to realise they’ve been conned. The original manipulators are dead and a new batch have taken over and they can deny any responsibility.

    Meanwhile the tools available to the manipulators grow in complexity – movies and media, public parades and posturing – any grand charade that can be played out on the world stage. Any deeply-held belief is ripe for hijacking, from religion to republicanism.

    One way or another they gotta make us take sides.

    “Hey! Don’t give me that crap. He’s not my brother, he’s my enemy and deserves to die!”

    You have to laugh or else you’d cry.

  • red pill

    Mal:
    One way or another someone will make you pick a side. No man is an island. We are social creatures with an independant mind and oriented to find profitable experiences of one sort or another. Sadly for survial potential we are not ants, or bees or other life-forms which have group survival as a paramount goal. Unlikely are there any bees or ants that willingly sneak in wasps or bears to ruin the nest on the promise that they will be spared repercussions or will be able to assume queenship or a comfortable retirement. How do I know life is cheap? Because that’s the lesson taught repeatedly. No amount of pontificating has changed it. All people are not the same, are not created equal and priorities will be established in accordance with natures law. It will not change. Leaders have priorities and capacities that the followers do not have. people are willing to accept anything provided to them it its procided to them in terms of some benefit along the way. There is but one basic standard for any culture: How many of us are there and how do we not become extinct…

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    Some crossed wires here. I’m basically agreeing with you.

    The mullahs don’t strap bombs to their own waists or put themselves in the line of fire.
    When McArthur left the Philippines (via a carefully-planned escape route) declaring, “I shall return”, nobody mentions the gold that he’d sent on ahead to Australia.
    When he ‘returned’, nobody mentions the fact that he used US planes to fly in bottle caps for the San Miguel breweries because had a stake in the beer industry.

    A national hero is a national hero and it’s heresy to say anything else. Similarly, a martyr to Islam is a martyr. To deny either questions your ‘loyalty’ – and where would we be without loyalty?

    We’d be thinking for ourselves – that’s where we’d be.

  • red pill

    Mal:
    You allude to something vaguely suggesting commercial/financial enterprise is less than honorable. Try then living a lifestyle where those issues are not foremost and then see how much you like it. Subsistance farming is not a lifestyle for me. Do I care that others toil at it? Not so much, my bad.
    You may agree with me or not, but I smell a little too much residual “We’re an autonomous commune” essence in your posts today. In a global world whare a package can be sent to the other side of the planet in 20 minutes there are no more autonomous communes. Everyone is now on the same playground and the bullies and wannabe bullies good or bad have staked out their plans for the rest of us. You may not want to pick a side, but I assure you someone else has plans for you whether you pick a side or not…

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    Sorry, ‘red pill’, I didn’t address your main point.

    You really believe that we all have to ‘pick a side’? That no thinking man can live his life deciding what’s good and bad in each situation that he comes across? All of our brothers are merely pawns in a games played out by the Gods? Whence cometh this nihilism? It sounds like schoolyard football where the smalest/physically weakest is picked last for the team. Humans did not evolve that way.

    Nature’s laws are things we can’t deny, like gravity and quantum mechanics.
    The desire to kill each other is not a law, it’s merely an inherited genetic trait that might be useful for survival. We can ignore it, use it or mis-use it as we see fit.

    The world that’s defined by western culture heads for extinction (look at birthrates around the world). What are your options? Will you die a glorious death in defence of freedom or will you stay at home and make babies, in the sure and certain knowledge that you will pay child support for every last one of them – and be accorded very little respect in either case?

    Don’t pick on me, mate. I couldn’t stand the heat so I left the kitchen and found a new one. Wonderland wasn’t so wonderful after all.

    In my new world men kill each other for greed. It’s no less insane but much simpler.

  • bigpapa

    Or maybe,,,, it was just a movie????

    I really enjoyed it,,,,, duty, honor, country is what I got from it…

  • red pill

    Mal:
    There is no good answer. We are not here to succeed at our task but to fail. Those that don’t pick a side will have one issued to them by someone else based on their own incentives. You can hide, but you won’t be unaffected. Most of those not picking a side are keeping their options open, not out of principle, but out of survival, not wanting to be on the wrong side when all else has been determined.
    Killing not normal natural behaviour? You don’t get out much do you? We constantly kill something in order to survive, herbavores kill plants to eat them, carnivores kill other animals for food or just to prove a point or two about who’s gonna survive. I killed worms in puddles simply driving to work today. Not out of a desire to kill, just a desire to get what is my stuff done for my own comfort.
    Sometimes you just gotta break some eggs.

    *Sniff* Maybe I’ll see them again on the rainbow bridge?

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    This is interesting RP and I’ll do my best to respond before I crash out (It’s 2am here and it’s been a hard day).

    “You allude to something vaguely suggesting commercial/financial enterprise is less than honorable. Try then living a lifestyle where those issues are not foremost and then see how much you like it. Subsistance farming is not a lifestyle for me. Do I care that others toil at it? Not so much, my bad.”

    Nope! Commercial enterprise is great if the environment is conducive. My 60/70′s dream was to buy a small farm where I could raise a family in peace. Working in a Broker’s office plus buying and leasing inner-city properties gave me the power to realise that dream. I worked at it for 13 years and still carry the scars. Beware of post-modern summaries. Some of us really tried.

    “You may agree with me or not, but I smell a little too much residual “We’re an autonomous commune” essence in your posts today. In a global world whare a package can be sent to the other side of the planet in 20 minutes there are no more autonomous communes.”
    (You forgot to add- ‘if you can afford to pay for the postage’. The ‘manipulators’ can afford it. Ordinary people (90% of the world’s population can’t.)
    No again. In the Far East I live a good life. But if the worst came to the worst, I could survive on fish-heads and rice becuse it’s possible.

    Perhaps you have a keen nose, but it betrays you if think you can safely accord me the label of ‘liberal hippy’. That might have been true 35-40 years ago but much water has passed under the bridge since then. Some priveleged westerners may see themselves as autonomous (like Wimmin’s Studies professors). They prey on the surplus wealth that technocratic civilisations produce, but it’s merely an illusion. They are people of little account. The more they are glorified, the weaker western society becomes.

    Whatever made you think that the ‘playground rules’ have a universal application? It’s not always about gangs. In some societies, believe it or not, the bonds of friendship that are forged during the school years can last a lifetime. Some schools actually teach that loyalty to classmates, schoolmates and country are way above playground squabbles. We have to watch that too – lest it get out of hand and lead to another kind of suicidal martyrdom.

    We needn’t worry too much about our daughters. The whims and fancies of female hormones are respected and accommodated in most societies, The precious ‘breeding stock’ is accorded a special place, even when it aborts its own offspring for selfish reasons.
    Our testerone-fuelled sons need careful advice. The ‘manipulators’ are seeking them out. Only fathers can advise them of the many pitfalls. Why would feminists want to exclude fathers? Know the enemy!

    So ’300′ says what?

    Let men play their games as long as it makes them happy.
    Just be sure that wimmin make the rules behind those great movie takes of glorious battle. Let wimmin complain that they are without husbands and sons to keep them in comfort.

    Just as in Ancient Rome, when the Barbarians we’re at the gates, the ‘wimmin’, like the fat, rich senators of old, will say, “But there’s no more water for the baths!”

  • red pill

    Mal:
    I don’t place much value about writings that excessivily use ‘if ‘ and multiple questions, finding it pointless. Anyone can throw in the odd ‘f’ and grin like a cheshire cat. I like to focus on the known, on the obvious because I’m not that smart to process all the theoretical potentialities available. Questions without answers should be avoided in my opinion as pointless.
    It’s fine to live in a 3rd world village at take advantage of your skills when applied against bronze-age competitors. If that is the lot you throw in with, fine, but you’re only there because it’s a better value for your resources, making it YOUR commercial/financial gameplan and you know it. You’re not there for any more honourable reason than the booze, drugs, bodies or food is cheaper and the likelyhood of getting away with whatever it is you don’t exactly brag about is greater than in the first world.
    The movie is about picking a side and sticking to it at all costs, something that far too many westerners have abandonded to pursue their own leisures while expecting someone else to take their place…

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    “You don’t get out much do you?”

    Now that was really underhand, coming from somebody I had formerly regarded as a thinking brother. Thank you Grasshopper for your wisdom.

    We have several alternatives:
    We can compare our life experiences and tell each other where we’ve been in the world, what we’ve seen, what we’ve done and where we are now(with supporting evidence).
    Or we can measure our penises and send the results with witness affidavits.
    Or we can simply discontinue this piss-pot parochial discussion.

    Sorry RP, I really don’t see the point of schoolyard brawling. To you it’s just natural, so you just go ahead and nuke the world until you can say, “I told you so”. A ruined world would be your world – right?

    No! I’ll not take sides with the playground bullies of any colour or creed.
    If you really want to feel important, come to my house, knock on the door and blow yourself up. That way we’ll both die well.
    It will make the international news for a day at least.

  • http://www.englishpro.ph Malakas

    “I don’t place much value about writings that excessivily use ‘if ‘ and multiple questions, finding it pointless. Anyone can throw in the odd ‘f’ and grin like a cheshire cat. I like to focus on the known, on the obvious because I’m not that smart to process all the theoretical potentialities available. Questions without answers should be avoided in my opinion as pointless.
    It’s fine to live in a 3rd world village at take advantage of your skills when applied against bronze-age competitors. If that is the lot you throw in with, fine, but you’re only there because it’s a better value for your resources, making it YOUR commercial/financial gameplan and you know it. You’re not there for any more honourable reason than the booze, drugs, bodies or food is cheaper and the likelyhood of getting away with whatever it is you don’t exactly brag about is greater than in the first world.”

    Yes, in most respects, but I didn’t brag about the pros and cons of my adopted homeland. I just made a choice. If others make the same choice, they’ll get more or sometimes less than they expected. What’s the big beef? It’s not America? American values (whatever that means) don’t always prevail? Well, welcome to Planet Earth.

    “You’re not there for any more honourable reason than the booze, drugs, bodies or food is cheaper and the likelyhood of getting away with whatever it is you don’t exactly brag about is greater than in the first world.”

    A little of that is true, but coming from somebody who seems to have only a second-hand, distant media view of the Far East and probably never set foot outside the great US of of A, (well, to do so would be very dangerous unless there was a VFA (Visiting Forces Agreement) with the host country) , it rings hollow.
    To actually live, work and integrate in a new country and support a family that are bona fide citizens requires something more. Are you still hung up on Asian-bar-girls porno movies?
    True, I’m not adept at climbing coconut trees and I don’t know how to fish with expertise.
    Gameplan is the right word. I can translate legal documents into English and fix a diesel engine. I can do electrical and plumbing work to a far higher standard than people I might employ. You’re right – these are minimal skills for a subsistence economy – but it buys me a little respect.
    As for women, I don’t buy genitals, I buy allies.

    I’m tired of defending. What do YOU do that buys YOU respect in your own society?
    You have a desperate need to cry,”Sour Grapes!” Why?

    Is your present situation so hard to bear that you’d rather attack your brothers than confront your real situation? It seems to me (but what do I know) that might be the real reason for your personal attack.

    If you really feel that taking sides is the best option there’s an open invitation for willing cannon-fodder.

  • amfortas

    My friend Malakas makes a spirited defense against RPs position. I generally find myself in some sort of agreement with RP as well, mind you. Both fine guys. But guys, when we talk about taking sides it is as though there are only two. There are many, many sides unfortunately – or fortunately if that’s what you prefer. Neither getting away to an overseas haven or staying at ‘home’ and ‘enjoying’ the benefits of civilisation doesn’t take one away from oneself. The individualism of western man is assailed from every quarter even internally.

    Malakas, I admire the way you embrace the lifestyle choices you have made.

    On the film. Its typical. It avoids the fact that Sparta was a matriarchy but emphasises the worst aspects of male behaviour in order to show the ‘best’ – God help us – of female. It posits as fact the death or glory drive when in fact we have little knowledge of the reasons (individual, personal and group) for the stand these men made. Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do, like it, embrace it, or not. Sometimes there isn’t a choice.

    The quote – ‘“Come back with your shield, or with your head on it.” is well known – it was actually from a mother to her son not from a Queen to a King – and shows, if anything, the complete disregard by women for the lives and integrity of even their own progeny.

    In Sparta it was the ‘lifestyle’ for men to live mainly in all-male barracks much of the year, with women living in homes. The men would ‘visit’ the women. The women would often visit the barracks too, and not just for a one on one! Women owned properties, huge estates in some cases, ran businesses, controlled the markets and trade and were just as adept at martial skills as the men. Training in war skills and competetive athletics were mixed gender affairs.

    One also has to look at that time and region with a broader eye. Sparta was one of a number of city-states. The Persians were not after them alone. It wasn’t ‘personal’ as the femonazis say. Putting the conflict as a small force of Spartans against the massed millions (there weren’t ‘millions’) of Persians is plain daft. Sparta wasn’t even located in the front line, geographically. This was an ‘incident’, albeit of historical proportion and not unique. Roland held back the Carolingans too. Goodness, the Battle of Long Tan could rank. The film tends to ignore the involvement of all the other Greeks.

    If I were a Laconican, I just might have something to say for a change.

  • red pill

    all I’m saying is that the fundamental conept of whatever societal paradigm is in play is that you yave to be a shameless shcuvanist for your side. You cannot shift allegiances to suit you individual purposes. I don’t defend one form or gov’t over another, rather point out that the rules have to stay the same or you get chaos. Everyone wanting the best deal for himself is not a recipe for success as a lifestyle or a culture. Buggering off and sniping about those one leaves behind be it Fred or Mal is chickeshit nihlism paraded as principle….






Search