One can only guess at what characteristics
a super hero would have in order to take or be given the mantle of a world superhero.
In some way it would be easier to hold onto the characters that are portrayed
in sci-fi / action films, bestowed with exceptional powers or enhanced ‘human’
abilities that are put to a use, presumably beneficial to humanity and
sometimes against the negativity of an opposing force. But these characters are
often put into a scripted context that bears little reality to the actual
everyday life of the ordinary world. They are just figments of someone’s
imagination viewed as a limited two dimensional character unhindered by the sustaining
complexity and minutia of just drawing real life breath. Occasionally in the
normal world someone will be called a hero for doing something exceptional but
it will be a classification given to a person for a local outstanding action
and not, in effect, an exceptional activity spread throughout the world with
any lasting prominence or historical impact, so no superhero.
That there has been notable characters
throughout history is a given but they did not come close to being seen as ‘super’,
for being an exceptional presence on the world, as a superior force known then and
still known as such now; as an active powerful influence that has pervaded through
time. Any good that is assumed attributable to notable characters which they independently
did, whilst around, will have faded with their footprints to the extent that
the interpretation placed on their historic actions will have been overlaid by contemporary
understanding and out of full contextual substance to the overall demands of
their period. This ought not to undermine whatever notable action was ascribed
them, but ‘super’ they were not and many people today will possibly find it
difficult to place a name to more than a few notable characters and also be unable
to attach the causes for their historic fame.
In some way it may be useful to
put any ‘good’ characters alongside one that is made up of ‘bad’ ones and find
which of them comes easier to mind with a charge sheet of deeds for each. One
thinks that it will be possibly an easier task listing the ‘bad’ ones (say of
the 19th/20th century) and highlight the nasty deeds ascribed
to them and a little more difficult to list the ‘good’ ones but in either case,
in an historic or ‘modern’ sense, for all, it will be a matter of judicious opinion.
For each character will have probably a short term in which to have made a mark
on history and is unlikely to have had an impact that rolled forward into
decades or centuries, preferably with the imparting of action and attitudes of
equitable righteousness for humanities civilisations development.
As in all things there are points
at which some exceptions can or could be inserted to include individuals that
historically will be known as characters of influence, primarily for their
contribution to the knowledge and creative understanding of the philosophies
and sciences that had application into the cognizance of creation for the natural
material world such as:- (not in any order or importance):- Plato, Socrates,
Thomas Aquinas, Voltaire, Galileo, Descartes, St Peter, Augustine of Hippo,
Aristotle, H. Martineau, Durkheim, A. Comte, Newton, Mozart. + Etc etc?
Or perhaps a list of those that
had none-creative / destructive influences such as: - (not in any order or
importance):- Genghis Khan, Attila, Nero, Caligula, Ivan the Terrible, Hitler,
Stalin, Vlad Dracula, T.de. Torquemada, Pol Pot, Mugabe. + Etc etc?
But none of the above, one
thinks, qualifies them as ‘super’ (good or bad) from the point of view that
their ‘good’ deeds shaped humanity as a species for the better and equally the
destructive influences of the ‘bad’ ones do not really match up with the adage
of ‘lessons of history’ for the same transgression against humanity to reoccur.
No doubt they all had an effect on the procession of history as exceptional or malevolent
people for their thoughts and actions but can it be said that any have had an
ongoing qualitative noticeable improving impact on the nature and substance of humans
today?
Up to now one has not been able
to accept that there has been anyone whom it could be said to be of ‘super’ substance
and of exceptional global determining impact. In the undemanding list of above,
they are all males which points to a distinct lack of historic inclusiveness of
females whom also must have had a role to be inserted in a listing but one has
to dig them out from the overburden prejudices of historical narratives and who
have been carelessly disregarded by the paternal patronising of the male
dominance for their own insertion of outstanding or dubious contributions. So
few females have reached a pinnacle of easy (or not) memorable notoriety good
or bad such as: - (not in any order or importance):- Boadicea, Catherine the Great, Empress Wu
Zetian, Zenobia, E. Pankhurst, F. Nightingale, Amelia Earhart, Ada Lovelace, Rosa
Parks, Joan of Arc. + Etc etc?
In looking at the tensions of the
world today and bearing in mind the difficulty that some individuals have had and
still have, whom may have been seen to have better or enlightened ‘human’ attributes
and ideas, are still not endowed with any super-power but they may have offered
a direction to a use for their ideas and pointing to a way which may be
beneficial to humanities survival. These sorts of people are sometimes quickly up
against the pessimism and apprehension of stronger opposing forces that is advantaged
by the apparent meekness of their perhaps un-strident presentations. The
conflicting powers intent is to destroy beneficial perhaps progressive ideas.
It can be difficult for these progressive
individuals and their open-minded ideas to make any clear progress in being acceptably
tolerable. So it is strange yet common to see the relative ease in which forces
of negativity perhaps built of uncertainty, fear, anger, or voracity gain
traction in the undermining of any acuity that people may have, in assessing a
‘balance of probability in truth’ surrounding proffered inspirations. Destabilising
such people is to be seduced into willing disbeliever of perhaps truth or facts
and it does seem to have become easier to hold onto those ‘reality’ detractors
due to the limited exposure they have to critical factual analysis of
challenging ideas, inspirational or destructive ones. Now (in ones opinion) there
is sufficient indication to support ones accusation of the decrease in acuity
within an increasing segment of populations and it is being exploited by power
factions with blatant actions like: - In the face of unacceptable condemning
truth, lie with any diverting speciousness to circumvent reality and keep on
lying, ignore provable evidence and fabricate alternative disconnected factoids.
For believers in the purveyors of the spurious fiction of calculated lies,
misinformation and obscuration’s, projected by their preferred representatives
on the political public platforms, would rather keep a 'faith' in the lies and
liar than move to a factual truthfully considered position of their own, or one
measured by others, for them to ‘consider’, than admit they have been
inculcated within errors.
As a matter of (one’s own) empirical
evidence in the decreased ability of people to be their own analysers, on the probability
of the balance of relative truths in assessing opposing views, one offers the
following as a test. Find in school / educational establishments, any attempt
to regularly train the youth in the ability to seek and balance evidence of the
impact of societies created policies on the civics approach of their neighbourhoods.
Or evidence of considering reasons / consequences of ‘strap lines’ ‘headlines’
or ‘memes’ and to follow (or research) global ‘news breaking’ items. There is
none. Or assess for a number of people that assiduously read or follow a particular,
self selected ‘news worthy’ item and who also look to examining a different
stream provider on the same subject; the scope is somewhat miniscule as most
tend to adhere to a favourite source. It will be all but impossible to
establish a quantifiable large effective number within a population. In being wary
following ‘believable news’ it is difficult, time consuming and requires a good
measure of concentration to follow any ordinary news promoted issue that may be
multifaceted in its delivery by providers. And as many people are either too
busy or ‘switch off’ from engagement; so increasingly many people have opted
for the easily digested, accepted, single strap line news, memes, gossip and
hearsay all without any complex thinking addition of their own. This results in
the intent of the subtle corruption of what passes for truthful news upon which
deceits are imbedded to manipulate an unwary populace to camouflaged dishonesty.
This projection of dishonesty is
so much in evidence now on the world political stage demonstrated by the 1st
worlds move to be open to accept “strong” leaders who are invariable holders of
bizarre intense unstable views, corrupt, egotistical, power-grabbers, dictatorial
and liars. However whatever unsavoury characteristics they have, they are accepted
and given a odd popular reception such as seen with;- Trump, BoJo, Putin, Modi,
Erdogan, MBS, Khamerci, Orban, Netanyahu etc; and none of them have any
qualities that are ‘superior’ so one looks on in dismay on those followers that
have fallen for conviction in them. As human history demonstrated the fad of
lauding strong leaders does not end well so all those people that have their
own dreams, expectations, desires, fears, disappointments, and prejudices with
knowledge or not thereof, of their own modes that directs their judgement choice,
commit to stand behind their chosen leader. With this complicit alliance, all
these followers generate a force that is amalgamated into a murmeration of a
constructed tribal outlook, building a blockade to the counterbalance of truth
however and against whoever presents it. How can this be?
It is one thinks an indictment of
the degradation in the intelligence of populations that reside in countries
where it is assumed that by virtue of expansive education, peoples should be
capable of assessing some elements of supported information as being closer to
an accurate proposition of detail as presented against unsubstantiated
information. However when looking at the state of the main displays of public
disseminated information, it is apparent that there is an astounding
inability to assess and probe such output for its reasonableness to fact or fiction.
Whether this is due to the sophistication of media subtle presentations, the
acceptance of strap-line news or memes and deceptive reporting as being
possibly contributing factors but also one may extraordinarily offer the deleterious
diets effecting brain function of ‘normal people’, or many just abrogation of
personal responsibility. How many, do you think of such ‘normal’ people would
be willing to sit through, without restraint, something like, (for example) say
the 5 complete Reith lectures by Jonathan Sumption on Laws etc (1) and comprehend with some
understanding the complexity of the ‘discussion’ before pressing the off button.
5% to 50% could be a generous number of willing participants however it is just
a guess. But one assumes that this low conjecture possibly explains the raise
in the obtuseness of populations one is accusing. Perhaps this also account for
the selected prominence of the current batch of disagreeable leaders?
In one limited circuit and from
overheard conversations, which one knows is not any form of proof that what one
is about to commit to words of inky substance is an immutable commonly held
fact however within those obtuse people the degree of compassion for anyone not
of their deserving charity or indeed not of their tribe, which also encompasses
the undeserving poor, beggars, street sleepers, homeless, destitute, disabled,
unemployed, child poverty, working poor, hungry, foreigners or anyone who may
have the temerity, by being in existence to cause them vicarious upset; also to
offer a different perspective of how these others are living in a different reality
with supportable factual truth of their condition, is a disconcerting affront
to their settled view. There is a positional conflict one assumes, between what
they (the obtuse?) prefer to believe as the reason for their own deserved comfort
/ security and the deserving fragile life style choices afflicted onto others. It
is an internal divergence, a dissonance which simply hardens their closed perspective
which may be bolstered by the fabricated outlook of popular leaders with everything’s
OK balm of snake oil comfort.
The superficially of what passes
for civility understanding in the obtuse is surprisingly a thin veneer, to see
exposed part of the bases of their beliefs built on self deception and
fabrication. It does come as an unexpected unpleasant experience to be witness
of vitriolic expressed prejudices; not that one is paragons of virtue nor does
one claim to be on distant terms with unsound emotively driven expressions or
being without considered prejudices however one can see when their form of considered
fairness morphs to calculated unfairness and their relative affluence uncovers
the effluence in the meanness of their spirit. Even from those that on the one
hand did not obviously have the beneficence of a favoured life and of those
that apparently did, for them to locate themselves to the conservationist’s (Cons)
existence, can be a surprise. So it is disappointing to have a view that so
many saps are much less than their presumed better capabilities. In general one
would state that half (?) appear less than the sums of their didactic ingredients,
to direct with dubious conviction, in the fabrication of misrepresentations
smothering the actuality of truths?
Well, none of this is really of
any use to move closer to an answer to the heading but into the morass of the
existential threats, now that the world is being made cognizant to; tenuous global
peace, humanities environment and economic instability etc (?). There is an inclination
for the common people to throw up unsound leader pretenders, posturing pop
solutions, who are probably incapable of charting a foundation upon which to
build a secure sustainable future for humanity. Even while the tumultuous
adjustment required are laboured through on the watch of unsafe leaders, perhaps
culminating in the proclamations of “never again” and “lesson will be learnt” afterwards
from their Machiavellian acts, their significant legacy will in decades be soon
irrelevant and of course none are ever likely to be able to be given or carry
the mantle of being a ‘super’ person.
From the above and one knows it
is just insubstantial opinions, it does appear then that the era now is stuck
in a continuing cycle of disappointments; assurance in good leaders does not really
have the power to redirect humanities development throughout the ages just as
the bad ones fade into the milieu past. And there remains a disappointment in
the ability of the rise of a super hero (wo/man) outside the two dimensional
veneer. However in looking for some indication of a personage that over centauries
has had an indelible presence, not noted as being ‘super’ but whom have most undoubtedly
laid a presence onto the centauries and from which the world continues to
suffer or benefit from in their directives for humanity; brings up a number of
characters: such as Abraham, Jesus Christ, Mohammad, Buddha Etc. and as usual
no females, unless one put in Jezebel, Miriam, or Mary M(?) but it is obvious
that their influence if they had any is not as substantially endemic as the
four culprits one has picked on. One can elect to pick at the influential
practicalities whatever these four espoused, for being of any relevance to a
modern era but the evidence of the persistence of their directives is still
seen as belligerently suffused consequences, throughout the world.
Were they ‘super’, probably not,
even leaving aside any notion of (superpowers) miracles or extraordinary
eruditeness, they were souls of their time who offered a script potentially
beneficial to humanity. These beings were a presence on the world as a (superior)
probably dangerous force, known then and still known as such now, as an active causative
energy that has pervaded through time; they were not super wo/men. Unwittingly
they may be ascribed as being examples of ‘super’ now due to their long-term
impact legacy left on global cultures but were they just inspired souls before
the ‘super’ term was established?
Given the state global
uncertainty to resolve or mitigate expanding tempestuous issues and the uplift
of dubious charlatan leaders overlooking expanding inequality and the seeming
renunciation of guiding humanity principles etc; so far as the saps species is
concerned one is not sanguine on its future when it seems willing to acquiesce
to travesties on honesty and truth with leaders of incompetence and liars. So
in answer to one’s own question, the answer is yes. It does need a super wo /man,
only GodAllahTetragrammaton knows where
one can be and anyone can make up a list from which to choose attributes that
would be considered disquieting against the devious charlatans: - Humility, not
to tolerate uttering lies or the lying of others, a challenging vision of a integrated
(nirvana?) earth, speak its truth to power, hold to virtuous foundation principles
based on concerted integrity, unconcerned for own self gain, speak for justice,
equality, have superior cognitive and emotive intelligence and hold misapplied influential
powers to account. Maybe (being fictional) throw in some unused remarkable abilities
for god measure to get the attention of the sheep however even with these
attributes, one is not sure that the saps treatment of a proffered potential super
wo /man would be any different than other times; for when saps are faced with
paradigm shifts in thinking, actions and a need to adjust mores, the forces of
destructibility do not respond well.
Is there an obscuring mote in the
eye of the souls of all such acuity deficient saps, well perhaps or not; there
is one in one's own but one does try to pick at it, anyway by the time a super Wo/Man turns up, one will have gone
home.
© Renot
121201539
(1) www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/ Reith Lectures 1-5.
Labels: Super Wo/Man
