Content
    1 The fetters of Aristotle
    2 Rethinking Rap-Music
    3 Perverted Morality and the revered Villain 

 

    1 The fetters of Aristotle 

    Reflecting upon how to end the grotesque amount of crime committed in the USA by the abuse of shooting weapons leads to the problem of a weaponization of interpersonal communications. By this, not only verbal aggression, or Hate-Speech, or the provocation of a physical struggle is meant, but also the killing of the participants of a communication by the murderous abuse of weapons. This criminal abuse became a criminal popular paradigm in the USA. 

    The USA developed a culture, that led to the weaponization of communication, by popular simplification, as in the primitive panaceum of the most popular "fuck", and phonetical mimesis, like in comic strips, who use verbalized sounds to signify violent impacts. 

    Also, the USA developed a heavily polemical verbal discourse, which, as its side products, not only popularized hate speech, and mobbing, but offensive verbalization in very general. 

    The dialogues of Hollywood productions are notorious, for their thoughtlessness, superficiality, primitivity, aversiveness, and lack of connection. The actors featuring in Hollywood productions rarely expand a universe of language with inherent logic, but they rather impress by the intensive use of expletives, swearing, and resumption by reduction to simple phrases, containing no arguments or wisdom, but expliciteness. 

    The art form of gangster rap is one lucid example of the dark, meaning unintelligent, suggestive, hostile, negative, and primitive style to produce a "flow" of verbalized aggression.

    Thus, a method to change US culture to the better, would have to start on a very grand scale, aiming to spread and reward a different communication paradigm, which prioritizes true logic over expletiveness and suggestive content. 

    Suggestion is the ideal expression of the ignorant, because its content is ambiguous, and needs not to be understood or followed in one single manner, but can be interpreted according to the fancy, and imagination, and limited knowledge of an audience.

    Nonsuggestive Communication usually is more elaborated, because it is the product of a will to exclude the many ways to misunderstand an articulation. It leaves no choice as to its meaning or content, and by doing so, often points toward a field of knowledge, that beckons an audience to deepen its knowledge, but by learning, instead of entertainment. Thus, suggestion is intuitively favored by the mass of the people, who do not enjoy learning, for the strain that is connected with it.

    A condition that makes things more complicated is the notion of a logic, that follows the polemical practice. Simply put, like all other persons of such calibre, also violent and abusive us americans understand a conversation to be effectively finalized, not prior to the the incapacitation of those communicating, brought about not by the application of conquering logic, but by armed violence. 

    Homo Factor is very common in the USA, and to him, there is no logic other than practice, which means action. 

    That communication is first of all a means not for concretion, but abstraction from excessive action and practice, because it seeks to economize human behaviour, by allowing to find the common purposes, that define the best of all practices, through exclusion of all detrimental, and senseless ones, is something that needs to be learned by Homo Factor. 

    That communication is not destined to be a weapon of practice, but, if at all weapon, one of logic and abstraction, and a means to relax, instead of aggravation and aggressivity, is unfortunately not self-evident, because the brain center that regulates and enables communication, developed from a brain center that regulates and enables general behaviour. 

    This means, that the USA has not gotten over Watzlawick yet, and will take a lot of time, to make a cultural progress, overcoming him, in the future, while other cultures appear to realize the point of Watzlawicks elaborations and examinations. 

    One means to make communication situations in such a culture less burdened with practical suggestions, competitions, and aversions, is to prove that communication, which is logical, but not necessarily straining, can lead to the overcoming of these three aspects. 

    Communicating people in the usa do not always benefit from the politicization of the social. If people in public are always laden with the suggestion, that they are representing a dozen people at the same time, races, entities, factions, actors, idols, and scapegoats, authorities, etc., they will start to communicate with a malign abundance of propositions, directed at the next opportunity of communicating. 

    The two propositional kinds of excess, that worsen a communication situation, are, to my understanding, first suprapersonal attitudes, which are the results of exterior, social interests, to impose additional roles and representations, and identities, and functions, on a communicating individual, that, by implicit collective effects, is tasked and affected to personate others, even those, the individual knows nothing of.
    
    Second, the overidentification, which usually is achieved by conscious and willing adaption and imagination of additional roles, identities, attitudes, and functions of an individual upon itself. 

    Both effect each other, both lead to an attitude of grandeur, and they dont stay out, only because somebody is a "nobody", or young, or powerless, or poor, or ignorant, on the opposite. A society, negative and malign enough for common and mutual abuse, has got more aversive purposes for its mobilizable agents in store, than are possible to conceive in a lifetime.

    To explain this with a simple example, if somebody named Cruisius acts while being motivated by the spirit of crusadership in the USA, this can not be a good thing for people in his vicinity. 

    Suggestion, which lends euphoria, grandeur, spiritedness and an understanding of being more and just an average individual, also leads to an excess of practical purposes, within contects of communication. 

    One possibility to understand communication, as a means to enable only communication, to celebrate verbalization instead of practice, and to grant verbal communication the purpose to achieve communication, could be a goal to deweaponize communications. 
    
    If logic and eloquence, instead of practice, if the prolonging of talks, instead of their finalization, would become cultural us american virtues, this could change the current situation. But this presupposes a culture of verbal communication, of learning languages, of cherishing meaning, truth, and knowledge. 

    It would be achieved, if curiosity, or rather, the will to know and to understand, would supercede the will to become practical. Then, the popularly understood end of communication would not any longer be its ending, but its purpose, not its reduction, but its unfolding. 

    At worst, this goal would not be achievable prior to a general ageing of the us society. Statistics show, that so many, if not a majority of criminals in the USA are comparably young, so education in regular schools would have to begin with a culture of discourse, instead of debates, of logics, instead of victories, and of curiosity, over zeal. 
    
    The realization of this is difficult to achieve, maybe the practiced ritualization of communication could help much, but for most young people there is no point in e.g. adapting anothers perspective, and argueing from within a role of another, if there seems to be no immediate reward for the communicating agent. 

    Of course, mutual validation of communicating people, according to their personal use of logic, but not according to their made points, could stimulate discussions, instead of polemics, but for this, there would have to be common communication purposes, not particular, or factional, conflicting ones. 

    Social media improved the situation, for they are one means to make people realize, that connections, and relations, and communication possibilities can be more important than any concrete issue and individual person. 

    The weaponization of communication means precisely the opposite, which is the valueing of the individual, elevating itself to be the primary issue, over every other purpose of interaction. 

    People of great wisdom are understood to be the classical scholars of humanity, despite their being very old, mostly dead already, or some of them of even antique origins, like Aristotle. 

    Despite that their teachings, thus should be only meaningless in contemporary social life, their influence from ages gone, is palpable, because their content is implicit, and urges to its practical concretion. 

    Though, although most people would disagree with Aristotle, that they only are political animals, the consciousness that man is animal like is inextinguishable, even today, and, even more so, did people like Aristotle define, what a slave, and a perpetrator have in common. 

    Both are outcasts from society, marginalized, powerless, and discriminated, both are forced to act, instead to think. slaves, so Aristotle, are ministers of action, and musicians Aristotle refers to as slaves.     
    The end of weaponization of communication would mean having to understand, that the sound of guns must not be the finalization of a dialogue. To achieve this, the "Master of ceremony", as a "Minister of action and music", who is at a social disadvantage, must become a master of logic, and language. US Society could gain a better knowledge of what the fate of detained criminals truly is like, because criminals in the USA most often do not know, that it is only one kind of communication, that ends with the perpetration of a crime, while many other kinds of communication first of all start with the perpetration. 

    Aristotle, a mediterranean, dead since more than 2.000 years, declared, that the outcasts are lovers of war, because they are outcasts. today, there are many societies with only few, if any, "real" outcasts. but the understanding, that the mere feeling of being one, would make an individual ready for warfare within a nation, thus causing stasis, and this within an already highly competitive society, basing its morals on warriors virtues, makes social relations in the USA and to US Americans more violent and aversive, than they actually need to be. 

    We live in societies, that, because of their scholarly traditions, value the word of people dead since ages, because they are classics, higher than the word of the living. in societies which are ageing at the same time, rapidly, this spells the doom of meaninglessness over many people who are young, and most detrimentally, over those who are young, intelligent, and educated. 

    Aristotle also declared that people can be born as slaves. this deficiency in this ancient classical scholars thinking already struck Walter Lippmann, who, in his "Public Opinion" commented on it. Aristotle wanted to save Dixie. If a weaponization of US society, and the brutalization of its people by shooting weapons shall cease, it is necessary to redeem a society of the 3rd millennium of such misunderstood, overvalued, and problematic conceptual burdens. 


    
    2 Rethinking Rap-Music

    Rap music is a good example to start with. It is made by speaking rhythm, not by content. It is made a spectacle by speed of talking, by repetitions, by expletives, catch-phrases, common places, rhyme, and by the personality of the artist, and his adressees. 

    Rap music is unintelligible, it can appear close to genial, because of its simple form, and emotionalize, because of its personal effects and propositions, without being intelligent in any possible way, because its meaning is, since it is always personal, and peculiar, particular and practical meaning, comparably small. 

    What makes Rap music spectactular, is its appearance to be logical, all by its form. Rap functions, by a substitution of content, through form. 

    The reason why people in the USA offend and kill each other in the context of block-parties, which are the scenes of rap-battles, can only be understood, if this conversion of form and personality into practical meaning, devoid of any general wisdom and knowledge, is understood. 

    Rap music apparently is one means to make mere rhythm of articulation become practically more consequent, by personal agitation and socially shared arousal. 

    To overcome this deficiency of rap music, rap artists have started to call their styles Oldschool and Newschool, Eastcoast and Westcoast, and whatnot. This categorization is a form of valueing, of making the personal rap act more important than it actually is, it adds intellectuality through the concept of school, it adds a regional scope and territorial claim by adding us american eastern and western semispheres. 

    Rap functions detrimentally, by negative suggestions. The rap artist is also politician, also master, also bigwick, also wizard and warlock, shaman, and, to choose a truly negative word from the repertoire of the liberal faction, to describe such populistic effects, a rabble rouser. 

    Rap could, far from that, function benignly, but what would be needed for this is obvious to see, a completely different way to understand rap music, the rap battle-event, and the artist. Of course such an understanding is impeded by atrocities, like that one committed by a massmurderer, from a hotel-window across a concertplace in Las Vegas on October the 1st, 2017, in Las Vegas. That criminal was white, so it is not a truly racial problematic, but a nationalist one, a current, and grave social problem of the USA. 

    Like mentioned before, the rap artist would have to turn, all by the music, into a simple person without virtual and suggested powers, titles, offices, and thymotic attributes, whose practical suggestions, if articulated, would have to be naturally ignored, because they are not the point of the music, and the spectacle. 

    Instead of serving the realization of a social struggle, or a sacrificial suggestion at the place of celebration, Rap music should do the exact opposite.
 

    3 Perverted Morality and the revered Villain 

    The us american cinema is famous and notorious. It divides the lovers and haters of the USA out of the very same reasons. The list of the 100 greatest US movie quotations is disturbing. It is advertised by the english wikipedia to include the most treasured content of cinematic culture, according to its impact on social life and communication habits of the us american society. 
    
    The files cited above contain quotes of some of these listed movies, and their popularity is a prove of common paraphilia in us american society, and its propensity for cultification of perversion, brutality, and the grotesque. 
    
    The good news is, that killer phrases are not the majority of the quotes, the bad news is, that lovely Katherine Hepburn is the only, delightfully positive exception to 99 other abysmal quotes.

    Anyways, most other quotes from this list, even if they are not precisely killer phrases circle around either the fighting with guns, brutal conflict, aversive behaviour, or perversion. 

    The conclusion from this cultification by notion, derivable from mimetically adapted habit, is that the common weaponization of communication, serving as a verbalized mimetical ritual corresponding with, running parallel to, or substituting a physical and violent struggle, leads to ironical excesses. 

    There is no doubt possible, that this 100 greatest us movie quotes ranking is meant to be totally serious, and that there must be reasons, why there were not the 100 most intelligent quotes assembled in such a list, like i.e. that these could, by us americans, not be considered to be the greatest, if they are intelligent. 

    Of course these quotations, with the one exception of the Hepburn quotation, have not once been the matter of a reciprocal, that is, social reflexion, since then every single one of the jurors, and the people interviewed, would have answered that they would rather not ever be those people who were talked to in real life. 

    This ranking of the 100 greatest quotes "works", because not one us american would ever think him- or herself to possibly be in such communicative situations, it works because us americans think that there are always enough dummy puppets, or victims around who absorb such "style" and make the irony work in the favour of us american national reputation. 

    There is another ranking of the "greatest villains" in us american movie culture, and this concept again, and more than the aforementioned proves the irony that is the basis of the cultural logic in the US. 

    While the concept of "greatest villain", which was determined to be the figure of Hannibal Lecter the cannibal, forensic genius, and serial murder is contradictory to the degree of being grotesque, the emergence of this concept also indicates, how US Americans can adore true criminals, who enjoy a rare, if not unique popularity in the us american culture, compared to any other. 

    Presumably the Batman-Killer from Aurora, Holmes, is a paradigm of how true criminals during the perpetration of their heinous acts, analogously attempt to moralize themselves and give, by this, some sort of makeshift legitimation to their crimes. 

    It needs a society that fares economically well, and is accustomed to crime, war, and peace at the same time, with an actual average personal prospect on life, to be rather kind, and ritualistic, so that such concepts can be accepted as morally correct, after all. There are many cultures on earth from within which the title "greatest villain of national movie culture" would not emerge at all, and, if somebody would create it, he would presumably be critized or eyed suspiciously for doing so. 

    If the creation of such a title, anyways, after thorough deliberations, would be deemed inappropriate, and people would have to think of how to something against it, there are few, and comparably easy things to do, like stimulating an intellectual discourse on the issue of cultification in general, and that of evil and perverted paradigms. 

    The most obvious would have to be the conscious decision of the many intellectually and morally concerned US Americans, that evil, as a principle should have to be the matter of research, instead of practice. The people of the USA must be able and willing to talk about the fascinating Evil as much, as to talk about the very common and general notion of being fascinated of Evil, and the cultural means to enjoy it. Only then, a theoretization can be conducted, which would lead to a secondariness of evil practice.