The Election of the
Inhumanoids
One of
the most iconic images of late 20th century science fiction movies
is the scene in Independence Day
where a huge alien mother ship that has been hovering over the White House
obliterates the building, and presumably all that it stands for, in one
shattering blast of pure energy. One of
the most beautiful features of this picture is that it is so unnecessary: the
control of our world is already in the hands of a power that is divorced from,
if not totally inimical to, humanity. I
don’t mean “humanity” simply as a DNA strand, but rather humanity as a system
of ethical values that doesn’t stop at the boundaries of our skin.
The approach of the season of
horror (I’m speaking not of Halloween, but of the upcoming November election
cycle) brings this topic to the forefront.
It is horrible because we are overwhelmed by the realization that our
cherished idol of the elective process is generally hollow in a world where the
candidates are pre-selected and, apart from the make-up called campaign
promises, very much the same. Choosing
among them, almost always a matter of the least of many evils, reminds me of a
wonderful episode of the Three Stooges where the boys find themselves in a
medieval dungeon. They are given the irrelevant
choice of how their execution will take place: do they choose to have their
heads chopped off or be burned at the stake?
Moe and Larry, like so many of us, try to apply micro-ethics in this
situation and opt for decapitation as the quicker alternative. However, Curly shows that choice is absurd in
such a dilemma by selecting immolation because “a hot steak is better than a
cold chop.” We are all about to be
asked, both next month and more importantly next November, whether we prefer to
have our heads chopped off or be burned at the stake.
Of course, I exaggerate (as do the
Stooges and all others who engage in satire as the only permitted form of
anarchy). We have an array of far more numerous
equally disgusting paths to the same outcome.
On the ends of the political spectrum there are even two extreme
candidates tolerated because the system finds it easier to let them deplete
their bank accounts rather than simply suppressing them. These are Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul. The former advocates a new approach to
government in which collective concerns would corral the unbridled forces of
corporate capitalism and transnational financialization. The latter advocates reaching the same ends
through the resurrection of individual control of the economy in a discrete
nation-state. Neither will win the
election, so bleak days lie ahead, but some of us can try, like Platon Karatayev
in War and Peace, to try to find one
decent potato in the bottom of the rotten sack to get us through to the next
day of our forced march to oblivion.
One issue the Inhumanoids will stay
away from is immigration reform. After all, it would only call attention to
their own alien aspects. Since they
represent financial imperatives that are fundamentally non-human and non-humane,
they cannot even appeal to a human ethnic voter base. Oh, Trump can play his little jingoistic
charade. Everybody expects it now. It resembles the guys in the second Battlestar Galactica that were always
spouting off about the Cylon menace while they were trying to take over the
ship themselves. Can Trump be a closet
Cylon? Or Carson? Or Hillary?
I don’t think Cruz is one – he’s more of a Cylon wannabe. He has something of the Renfield in him,
groveling around the Kochs and the Adelmans and asking when he will be allowed
to feast on creatures with blood, instead of spiders and roaches. Yes, his could be a truly Gothic presidency.
One of the Inhumanoids will control
the country after 2016. Whether that
face sports the almost atomic shine of Ted Cruz’s cheeks, the surrealistically
tyrannical hairdo of Donald Trump (reminds me oddly of the Harkonnens in Dune),
the creepy mock-submissive expression of Ben Carson or the deceptively
grandmotherly visage of Hillary (is Baba Yaga underneath it all?), it will
simply provide a mask for the Big Money that will steer our Republic over the
bounding economic seas. Whoever it is
will obediently sign the checks for all the cost-plus contracts the Pentagon
can dream up, even if it involves installing an Iphone on every square foot of
the ocean floor to monitor the fish in case they are communicating with ISIL. Whoever it is will obediently look at all the
photos of OMDs dished up by the CIA, DIA, DEA, or other alphabet soup entity
and agree that we should invade somewhere.
(Invade? No, that’s no good –
liberate? Democratize? Pacify? Get Publicity to come up with a new brand!) Corporate
financialized capitalism is content to give the orders and stay out of sight as
much as possible. It will not even
provide an obvious clue to its influence, like Ahab’s leg stumping over the
deck of the Pequod at night. We, the
motley crew of America, will not even have that much awareness of the maniacal
obsessions that guide our destiny.
In the meantime, we suckers are
treated to the Punch and Judy Show, the campaign debates. It is true that the Democratic Party seems to
have canceled its act in the show, but the Republicans have more than made up
for it by multiplying the candidates to such a degree that they won’t even all
fit on the same stage. Psychologists have recently determined that an
overabundance of selections actually makes it more difficult for an individual
to achieve a desirable solution, and
this campaign season certainly proves their point. This is a show that is guaranteed to make the
audience take notice, though the choreography and props allow only for limited
permutations: Punch can grab the bat and hit Judy or Judy can grab the bat and
hit Punch. Who will score the most
points this time? – Rubio? Mario? Carly Fiorino? Princess Daisy? Ironically, the most foolish puppet is the
public, who dutifully assemble every so often (and even pay money) to have
their intelligence insulted in this manner.
Denouement: there will be a
“winner” because there has to be a winner and the winner will take all and
deliver it like a rolled-up newspaper to the feet of its plutocratic
master. On that bloody morning after
the 2016 elections, the best an individual human, a Mensch, can hope for is to
be the one tin soldier that walks away.
Not like the movies. They offer
hope, albeit in the form of myth.
Villains, kaiju, those Mysterians with their funny noses, are always
defeated. In Independence Day, there was Bill Pullman to pull us up by our
bootstraps and declare that humans had won because they had made a smoking mess
out of… pretty much everything. Hey,
wait a minute, didn’t he start out as Lone Starr in Spaceballs? Let’s see… he
saves the galaxy by exploding a vacuum cleaner, marrying a Druish princess and
blowing Rick Moranis to the Planet of the Apes, which is really the Dead Zone
on Earth of the Future. It’s all
abundantly clear. Why can’t the campaign debates provide something as coherent
or as entertaining? We’re supposed to
get bread and circuses, promised to us two millennia ago, and this isn’t much
of a circus. And what about the
bread? Oh, it’s called Soylent
Green? Available at bargain prices like
Obamacare. And come January 2017, it
will come in a brand new wrapper named…?????
No comments:
Post a Comment