Saturday, March 24, 2012

the villains that we see in the movies

the villains of our movies can be said to be possessing some kind of compulsion that drives them to want to kill. Most of the time, when their activities are interfered with, they have no other alternative but to hit back, but the hero wins at the end.

There are some characters who like to inflict pain and some who enjoy watching people suffer.

even such characters have some kind of explanation behind their character.

There are some who are so rich that they have lost all connection with justice and fair play. even these are victims of their circumstances.

There are the caste villains who cannot allow a working class to get powerful and develop a voice. These people are a very sad case, as they have to maintain their superiority, which has been whetted by the priests.

These caste villains could be said to have grabbed tracts of land by some enterprise or by the way of having occupied a post of administrator or commander. It is not the case that they violently evicted some occupants and then occupied the land of the evictees, as that would have never allowed a peaceful existence. the loser would never forgive such an eviction.

How would it be if some group of people want to enforce their way of thinking on others who live in their own lands, in the adjoining regions.

This has been witnessed nowhere in the world except in the activities of the brahmins of india and the buddhists of sri lanka.

while the brahmins of india adopted the method of selling their texts as the word of god, the buddhists of sri lanka tried to write their intent into law.

from then on, as can only be expected, the tamils fought back, first using non-violent methods and then using violent methods.

after a long time, the sinhalese had a chance to defeat the tamils, but in the process, they forgot that they were recognized as a country, and that countries had developed rules of war, over the course of millennia.

human beings are not packs of the lowliest animals, without the faculties of thought and reflection.

human beings have over millennia realised the results of their actions after going through painful and severe times. beginning from the earliest man, they have developed experience which led to rules and procedures.

however, the people called the sinhalese, living in the south of sri lanka, have exhibited in the twenty first century after jesus christ lived, that human beings can turn into the lowliest of animals, with the disease of greed and the decay of the brain.

how can a human being, in the twenty first century after the death of jesus christ, want to believe that he can subdue some people and enforce his thinking over other people.

we will not under any circumstances allow others to impose on us their advice or solutions..this is what a representative of the sinhalese has said. 

how such a state came upon a people is the story of this millennium. did they continue to live like this? what happened to them in the days that followed, is what will be the defining story of this millennium.

the hutus can be said to have developed a grievance against the minority tutsis who were ruling them, but nothing, not even that it was africa, could excuse their genocide.

the sri lankans were probably egged on by India and others to win the war. but, if that backing allowed them to resort to indiscriminate violence and brutality, then they are a failed state, and not at all a state.

that they had the arrogance to tell the UN to keep out, must itself have foretold their behavior after victory. They began to behave suddenly like the whole island was theirs.

In three years following their victory, the only stories that have come out are killings, rapes and disappearances, and military enforcement.

The military presence makes it clear that the Tamil Eelam army was not a burden on the Tamils but was acting on their behalf. At times, its single-minded dedication to its job could have caused misunderstanding among the  civilians.

If the Tamil Eelam army were terrorists, why did the sinhalese need a military presence.

even when someone is branded as terrorist, there are rules and laws to handle them.

when a so-called state itself decides to execute and rape, which the so-called terrorists have never been documented as having resorted to, then who is the state and who is the terrorist.

whose land is it? who lived where?

if anybody thinks, that by inflicting brutality, status quo can be retained forever, then they are turning into the lowliest of animals, even any such lowliest of animals have rules and ways.

the sinhalese have lost it. this is what happens when one become greedy and wants the possession of others.

in our movies, the villain turns crazy in the end and needs to be killed.

the UN will have to decide how to handle this never-seen-before villain.

No comments: