We follow the journey of Sal, an ordinary middle-aged insurance clerk who, as a way of fantasizing away the cosmic pointlessness of his existence, dreams of a world without violence, poverty, and injustice and the many things he could do to effect change, if he only had the opportunity. One day, on a whim, he buys a lottery ticket that turns out to be the only winning ticket for the biggest jackpot in history -- over a billion dollars after taxes and fees.
Being a reasonably intelligent guy, he manages to set up a trust to receive the winnings. His trusted friend is a decent lawyer who is able to keep his identity a secret by filing all the appropriate paperwork through an impenetrable bureaucratic maze. At first he does nothing with the money: keeps his job, doesn't buy anything extravagant, doesn't even pay off his mortgage or car loan. He just goes about his life as usual, patiently waiting for the press to die down and quietly investing some money, more as a hobby than anything else.
After the furor in the media has subsided, he sets his plan in motion. He buys a private island somewhere in Indonesia through a series of shell companies, and begins developing a very high-tech, secure compound, mostly underground. He arranges to fake his own death, abandoning his life and retiring to his new compound. From this place he recruits a private army of highly-trained and very effective mercenaries, hackers, and financial experts. He begins slowly exerting the force of their combined expertise on global markets through strategically imploding large corporations and even a few smaller national banks and draining their value into his own stockpiled wealth. In the ensuing political and social unrest, his troops sweep in along with coordinated humanitarian aid and public works projects, transforming war zones almost overnight into stable states. He bankrolls resistance movements here, recognized governments there, and a large array of media outlets. He even successfully masterminds the assassinations of many of the world's worst despots, including some in highly influential countries.
The whole world is confounded by the sudden appearance of this state-level actor, operating apparently on par with a global superpower, but no one can figure out who is behind it. His final move is to force the United States, the EU, Russia, and China into an alliance against him by knocking off a few low-level diplomats and sabotaging some of their most important military operations. With no way of locating or even identifying him, the alliance is forced to pool their intelligence resources and learn to work together, accidentally causing world peace.
"Ha! I have done it!" he cries over simulcast TV, radio, and Internet streams, "I have fooled you into working together for the good of mankind!"
People everywhere cheer. Politicians, finally realizing the master plan is nearing its ultimate goal, manage to track the signal to the secret compound in Indonesia. They bomb it. Then they also bomb each other to erase the compromising intelligence they all have on one another. Everyone dies.
"BZZZZZZZZZZZ!" goes the alarm clock. Sal opens his eyes and heaves out a heavy, frustrated sigh. "Yeah, that would never work. Geez, what a dumb idea," he says out loud to no one in particular. Rolling out of bed and into his slippers, Sal gets up to make the coffee. His grand scheme for helping the world has been foiled again, but he refuses to be deterred. He is a good man, and he will, eventually, think of something. This scene repeats more or less daily for the next forty years, and then Sal dies.
:mittens:
Nailed it! :lulz:
:mittens:
Best use of the "it was all a dream" plot twist I've ever seen.
I really like this piece. I like how Sal is described as Ordinary. That actually gives me a little hope, if the average middle age insurance salesman out there really is dreaming of utopia. Like there's this benevolent potential in people, but it's being held back. Is it withheld by the grim realism of human nature? or is it merely something internal in Sal that makes him stay in the confines of everyday life?
What keeps Sal in stasis? Is it a feeling of helplessness? ie That Sal would be benevolent but he doesn't have the resources. That Sal would be benevolent but it wouldn't change anything.
I think that one thing that holds Sal back is that his dream is so big partly as an excuse not to take any action at all. After all, if we're waiting on that one big dream, that big windfall, the key to fixing everything, it's almost as good as taking an ordinary action that incrementally improves the world, right?
So instead of working for an NGO that makes people's lives better, volunteering with disadvantaged youth, or donating his time to help nonprofits start up, Sal dreams.
Nigel gets it. Sal is dismayed by the world being a news but feels overwhelmed and powerless. He has bought into the myth that small deeds can't add up in the face of such globalisery, and doesn't think he'll ever have the resources to really make a difference. In his mind the best use of his time is to dream up ways he could make a difference, if he had the money or the time or the skill. Which isn't inherently "bad", but it isn't very useful, either.
Also, yeah, I wrote this mainly to kick myself out of Sal's position.
I liked it, but now with Nigel's postscript I love it. May I use both?
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on March 21, 2017, 05:00:44 PM
I liked it, but now with Nigel's postscript I love it. May I use both?
you can use anything of mine since you're such a swell person.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on March 21, 2017, 05:00:44 PM
I liked it, but now with Nigel's postscript I love it. May I use both?
Feel free to use mine in whole or part!
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 21, 2017, 02:14:22 PM
Nigel gets it. Sal is dismayed by the world being a news but feels overwhelmed and powerless. He has bought into the myth that small deeds can't add up in the face of such globalisery, and doesn't think he'll ever have the resources to really make a difference. In his mind the best use of his time is to dream up ways he could make a difference, if he had the money or the time or the skill. Which isn't inherently "bad", but it isn't very useful, either.
I really like it. I think it's an important message because most people are now so convinced that they can't do anything that they don't even begin to try.
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 21, 2017, 05:46:27 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on March 21, 2017, 05:00:44 PM
I liked it, but now with Nigel's postscript I love it. May I use both?
you can use anything of mine since you're such a swell person.
Slander!
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 21, 2017, 07:45:02 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on March 21, 2017, 05:00:44 PM
I liked it, but now with Nigel's postscript I love it. May I use both?
Feel free to use mine in whole or part!
Thanks!
Quote from: Cramulus on March 21, 2017, 01:04:28 PM
I really like this piece. I like how Sal is described as Ordinary. That actually gives me a little hope, if the average middle age insurance salesman out there really is dreaming of utopia. Like there's this benevolent potential in people, but it's being held back. Is it withheld by the grim realism of human nature? or is it merely something internal in Sal that makes him stay in the confines of everyday life?
What keeps Sal in stasis? Is it a feeling of helplessness? ie That Sal would be benevolent but he doesn't have the resources. That Sal would be benevolent but it wouldn't change anything.
If there is a message of hope in here somewhere it would be that the power to make a difference is within your grasp at just about any moment. It's just that it's so much easier
not to, and easier by at least a little bit to make the wrong kind of difference. With the sheer immensity of problems on the scale of civilizations that we are confronted with thanks to the miracles of modern communication technology, good but small deeds seem impotent. There's really no excuse for it, but it seems like it's harder to give a shit about helping one person when there are seven billion in line.
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 22, 2017, 02:47:09 AM
Quote from: Cramulus on March 21, 2017, 01:04:28 PM
I really like this piece. I like how Sal is described as Ordinary. That actually gives me a little hope, if the average middle age insurance salesman out there really is dreaming of utopia. Like there's this benevolent potential in people, but it's being held back. Is it withheld by the grim realism of human nature? or is it merely something internal in Sal that makes him stay in the confines of everyday life?
What keeps Sal in stasis? Is it a feeling of helplessness? ie That Sal would be benevolent but he doesn't have the resources. That Sal would be benevolent but it wouldn't change anything.
If there is a message of hope in here somewhere it would be that the power to make a difference is within your grasp at just about any moment. It's just that it's so much easier not to, and easier by at least a little bit to make the wrong kind of difference. With the sheer immensity of problems on the scale of civilizations that we are confronted with thanks to the miracles of modern communication technology, good but small deeds seem impotent. There's really no excuse for it, but it seems like it's harder to give a shit about helping one person when there are seven billion in line.
Sort of the principle that it's easier to dream big and do nothing, than to take a small action that will mean something to a few people.
I guess maybe it's the "easier" part that's the problem. I keep telling my students, volunteer, volunteer, volunteer... but they say they don't have time, and they say "What's in it for me?", and they say maybe later.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 22, 2017, 04:12:27 PM
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 22, 2017, 02:47:09 AM
Quote from: Cramulus on March 21, 2017, 01:04:28 PM
I really like this piece. I like how Sal is described as Ordinary. That actually gives me a little hope, if the average middle age insurance salesman out there really is dreaming of utopia. Like there's this benevolent potential in people, but it's being held back. Is it withheld by the grim realism of human nature? or is it merely something internal in Sal that makes him stay in the confines of everyday life?
What keeps Sal in stasis? Is it a feeling of helplessness? ie That Sal would be benevolent but he doesn't have the resources. That Sal would be benevolent but it wouldn't change anything.
If there is a message of hope in here somewhere it would be that the power to make a difference is within your grasp at just about any moment. It's just that it's so much easier not to, and easier by at least a little bit to make the wrong kind of difference. With the sheer immensity of problems on the scale of civilizations that we are confronted with thanks to the miracles of modern communication technology, good but small deeds seem impotent. There's really no excuse for it, but it seems like it's harder to give a shit about helping one person when there are seven billion in line.
Sort of the principle that it's easier to dream big and do nothing, than to take a small action that will mean something to a few people.
I guess maybe it's the "easier" part that's the problem. I keep telling my students, volunteer, volunteer, volunteer... but they say they don't have time, and they say "What's in it for me?", and they say maybe later.
I'm hearing a
whole lot of this "what's in it for me/us?" lately. Why should we take in refugees. Why should we subsidize healthcare. Why should we feed hungry kids at lunch time. Why should we do anything. And yes those are bigger questions of public policy, but the reasoning behind not doing them an outgrowth of this "what's in it for me" thing that we all share to some degree. It's odd to hear this sentiment voiced so openly, because I could
swear that as I was growing up, the very same Right-Wing Christians who raised me, but are now behaving abhorrently, used to tell me "a good deed is its own reward." What happened to that?
There is a startling and appalling lack of compassion going around these days.
(http://i.imgur.com/zSiflh1.jpg)
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 22, 2017, 05:11:16 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 22, 2017, 04:12:27 PM
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 22, 2017, 02:47:09 AM
Quote from: Cramulus on March 21, 2017, 01:04:28 PM
I really like this piece. I like how Sal is described as Ordinary. That actually gives me a little hope, if the average middle age insurance salesman out there really is dreaming of utopia. Like there's this benevolent potential in people, but it's being held back. Is it withheld by the grim realism of human nature? or is it merely something internal in Sal that makes him stay in the confines of everyday life?
What keeps Sal in stasis? Is it a feeling of helplessness? ie That Sal would be benevolent but he doesn't have the resources. That Sal would be benevolent but it wouldn't change anything.
If there is a message of hope in here somewhere it would be that the power to make a difference is within your grasp at just about any moment. It's just that it's so much easier not to, and easier by at least a little bit to make the wrong kind of difference. With the sheer immensity of problems on the scale of civilizations that we are confronted with thanks to the miracles of modern communication technology, good but small deeds seem impotent. There's really no excuse for it, but it seems like it's harder to give a shit about helping one person when there are seven billion in line.
Sort of the principle that it's easier to dream big and do nothing, than to take a small action that will mean something to a few people.
I guess maybe it's the "easier" part that's the problem. I keep telling my students, volunteer, volunteer, volunteer... but they say they don't have time, and they say "What's in it for me?", and they say maybe later.
I'm hearing a whole lot of this "what's in it for me/us?" lately. Why should we take in refugees. Why should we subsidize healthcare. Why should we feed hungry kids at lunch time. Why should we do anything. And yes those are bigger questions of public policy, but the reasoning behind not doing them an outgrowth of this "what's in it for me" thing that we all share to some degree. It's odd to hear this sentiment voiced so openly, because I could swear that as I was growing up, the very same Right-Wing Christians who raised me, but are now behaving abhorrently, used to tell me "a good deed is its own reward." What happened to that?
I find the same question puzzling. Like, didn't they used to say that Atheists were selfish and immoral? And now, for them, charity work of any kind seems to be off the table.
Which is interesting, in that there's a parallel argument that if welfare is abolished, charity groups (widely assumed to be religiously based) will step in to cover.
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2017, 04:18:37 PM
Which is interesting, in that there's a parallel argument that if welfare is abolished, charity groups (widely assumed to be religiously based) will step in to cover.
That is the argument. But I find that entirely unacceptable, because no one should have to rely on serendipitous chance for their survival. And the people who insist that private charity will fill the gap have ulterior motives beyond simply "saving taxpayer money" (which itself is a farce), in that these "private charities"
are nearly universally religious groups and sometimes require the needy accept some measure of indoctrination in return for assistance. The most frustrating thing to me is how widespread the disconnection is for so many people from the fundamental theories underpinning civilization itself. We have grown so accustomed to modern convenience that apparently it is now possible for whole groups of people to assume that civilization is a natural law we can take for granted, that society simply
is, and thus they are free to abstain from participating in it as a member. Wiser generations used to say "no man is an island", but these people are immune to such nonsense, I guess.
My individualism is rugged, suh!
\
:redneck2:
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2017, 04:18:37 PM
Which is interesting, in that there's a parallel argument that if welfare is abolished, charity groups (widely assumed to be religiously based) will step in to cover.
Which is, of course, patently fallacious in that these presumed charity groups currently do not so much as fill the gaps left by government services.
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 23, 2017, 04:34:04 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2017, 04:18:37 PM
Which is interesting, in that there's a parallel argument that if welfare is abolished, charity groups (widely assumed to be religiously based) will step in to cover.
That is the argument. But I find that entirely unacceptable, because no one should have to rely on serendipitous chance for their survival. And the people who insist that private charity will fill the gap have ulterior motives beyond simply "saving taxpayer money" (which itself is a farce), in that these "private charities" are nearly universally religious groups and sometimes require the needy accept some measure of indoctrination in return for assistance. The most frustrating thing to me is how widespread the disconnection is for so many people from the fundamental theories underpinning civilization itself. We have grown so accustomed to modern convenience that apparently it is now possible for whole groups of people to assume that civilization is a natural law we can take for granted, that society simply is, and thus they are free to abstain from participating in it as a member. Wiser generations used to say "no man is an island", but these people are immune to such nonsense, I guess.
It really is a testament to how successful society IS, that so many people seem to feel they can opt out without immediate dire risk to their survival.
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 23, 2017, 08:03:21 PM
...
It really is a testament to how successful society IS, that so many people seem to feel they can opt out without immediate dire risk to their survival.
Truth. Just like only a person lucky enough to be born into the most fabulously wealthy civilization in human history could somehow end up believing that poverty itself arises only from bad choices or moral weakness, or only a person born under the fairest laws in history could somehow think injustice is a only a delusion in the minds of its victims. In past ages, when the whole world was hostile and the state really was out for your blood, no one would deny that some people got the short end of the stick by chance of birth and deserved something better than they had the power to earn for themselves. It's a serious indictment of humanity that once presented with the tools to eradicate disease, poverty, and starvation, we choose instead to just stop seeing those things as problems.
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 23, 2017, 08:31:31 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 23, 2017, 08:03:21 PM
...
It really is a testament to how successful society IS, that so many people seem to feel they can opt out without immediate dire risk to their survival.
Truth. Just like only a person lucky enough to be born into the most fabulously wealthy civilization in human history could somehow end up believing that poverty itself arises only from bad choices or moral weakness, or only a person born under the fairest laws in history could somehow think injustice is a only a delusion in the minds of its victims. In past ages, when the whole world was hostile and the state really was out for your blood, no one would deny that some people got the short end of the stick by chance of birth and deserved something better than they had the power to earn for themselves. It's a serious indictment of humanity that once presented with the tools to eradicate disease, poverty, and starvation, we choose instead to just stop seeing those things as problems.
Hot damn. I am impressed by your wordsing lately, and this is no exception. Nail, head.
Thanks! The words are coming easier lately than they have in quite some time, and not just on politics, but I'm definitely motivated to punch the shittier elements of the human condition linguistically if not physically.
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 23, 2017, 08:31:31 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 23, 2017, 08:03:21 PM
...
It really is a testament to how successful society IS, that so many people seem to feel they can opt out without immediate dire risk to their survival.
Truth. Just like only a person lucky enough to be born into the most fabulously wealthy civilization in human history could somehow end up believing that poverty itself arises only from bad choices or moral weakness, or only a person born under the fairest laws in history could somehow think injustice is a only a delusion in the minds of its victims. In past ages, when the whole world was hostile and the state really was out for your blood, no one would deny that some people got the short end of the stick by chance of birth and deserved something better than they had the power to earn for themselves. It's a serious indictment of humanity that once presented with the tools to eradicate disease, poverty, and starvation, we choose instead to just stop seeing those things as problems.
BIG WORDS THIS MOTHERFUCKER.
Quote from: LMNO on March 24, 2017, 01:21:55 PM
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 23, 2017, 08:31:31 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 23, 2017, 08:03:21 PM
...
It really is a testament to how successful society IS, that so many people seem to feel they can opt out without immediate dire risk to their survival.
Truth. Just like only a person lucky enough to be born into the most fabulously wealthy civilization in human history could somehow end up believing that poverty itself arises only from bad choices or moral weakness, or only a person born under the fairest laws in history could somehow think injustice is a only a delusion in the minds of its victims. In past ages, when the whole world was hostile and the state really was out for your blood, no one would deny that some people got the short end of the stick by chance of birth and deserved something better than they had the power to earn for themselves. It's a serious indictment of humanity that once presented with the tools to eradicate disease, poverty, and starvation, we choose instead to just stop seeing those things as problems.
BIG WORDS THIS MOTHERFUCKER.
Seconded! Please.
How do you guys want it credited? Seems like the best way to present it is as one block with the "Truth." cut out, as one speaker rather than a conversation.
Maybe... "Truth" as a heading (or removed) and the first "Just like" removed. Credit vexati0n
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on March 24, 2017, 07:59:42 PM
Maybe... "Truth" as a heading (or removed) and the first "Just like" removed. Credit vexati0n
Liquid perfection.
(http://i.imgur.com/wWvkTyM.jpg)
Like so?
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2017, 04:18:37 PM
Which is interesting, in that there's a parallel argument that if welfare is abolished, charity groups (widely assumed to be religiously based) will step in to cover.
"Are there no workhouses?"
LOVE. I will use this immediately.
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2017, 04:18:37 PM
Which is interesting, in that there's a parallel argument that if welfare is abolished, charity groups (widely assumed to be religiously based) will step in to cover.
Well, we had this before the modern welfare state.
That we went ahead and developed the modern welfare state anyway suggests that it was insufficient. Or cultural Marxists convinced us to do it, one or the other.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on March 30, 2017, 04:13:15 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/wWvkTyM.jpg)
Like so?
This is amazing. Quick, inspire me to write more things that are worth this kind of treatment.
I could really use some connective tissue between the Racism essay and everything else? It could tie in either to the larger theme of perception vs reality or The Revolution, or maybe off with the "don't be a dick" stuff?