not a hero

“there is nothing really right or wrong. only people on different standpoints.”

___

I’m not a hero. nor did I ever be, nor do I want to be.

because it’s pathetic. about how people contradicting themselves, and how people would want to act so-high-and-almighty to be ‘righteous’. and how people could be really driven about such. and how people could end up fighting and quarreling about the ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.

of course, we have law and orders. we suggest that they represent justice and equality and so on.

…but there are also things that are not being covered in that so-called law (and orders). it is there, and too much. and what constitutes right or wrong about such matters then?

and given such, we then could not really define what is ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong’. and do we really need that kind of hero in such circumstances — hereafter referred as ‘hero’?

::

I never want to be a hero. not really, not a chance.

by being a hero, you have the privilege to judge the right and wrong. you get sore to situations, and you take actions accordingly. you see something you feel ‘not right’, and then acting on your own to fix and ‘make it right’.

…but how do you know that what you are doing is righteous?

unfortunately, there is no answer to that. should it be written in law or code of conduct, then we might be able to judge — truth is, it is not. for such things not constrained by law, how can one says something is ‘wrong’ while not having privilege to say something as right?

by self-acceptance? ego? praises and thanks?

::

being a hero means saving someone else. but saving someone else means not to save another people. and so it goes, again and again.

I was never interested to say what is right or what is wrong, when it comes outside laws and code of conducts. there is not really right or wrong in such circumstances; only people getting hurt and people getting advantages, if any.

you can say that robbery is wrong. it is there in the law that controls society. you can also say that killing is wrong. it is also there in the law, thus people have to obey.

but you can’t say that cheating on girlfriend is entirely wrong — or right. you can’t say that lying to someone is absolutely wrong — unless when it comes to be fraud. you can’t also say that anything is wrong only because you disagree to such.

by choosing to be a hero, you are prepared to have enemies. sometimes it’s worth. sometimes it’s not. you are probably prepared for the name of law and justice. if it’s not for such? that would be your call then.

::

in the end, it’s just pathetic. people are only contradicting themselves. they want a hero, obliviously. they never need a hero for such reasons — only the ones supporting them of what they are doing. ensuring that they are on the right side. thus given the praises and thanks and boastful ego, so can anyone be a hero.

…or maybe not. there is nothing really right or wrong outside those defined in that so-called law to begin with.

is it okay to hurt our own comrades? is it okay to break someone’s heartful trust? is it okay to betray people? is it okay to hate someone else? is it okay to deceive someone’s feeling? is it okay to lie to a friend? is it okay to badmouth people? is it okay to leave someone behind? is it okay to hurt our so-called friend?

unfortunately, there is no answer to that. even if there is, it’s only baseless; how do you know that something is right? and what if it is obliviously wrong?

because by being a hero who (is supposedly) does the ‘righteous’ thing, you decided to fight what is ‘wrong’. you have your enemies then, but then come the questions: is it worth doing? or is it only that you are fighting those who are not on your side?

in the end, it’s just people quarreling and fighting over what they think is ‘righteous’. oblivious as it is, and they start hating then fighting whatsoever. baseless assumption. baseless righteousness. baseless acts.

::

I’m not a hero.

but really, humans can be troublesome.

8 Comments