10,051. RUDIMENTS, pt.102

RUDIMENTS, pt. 102

Making Cars

It's mostly the preliminaries of

things that get me so going; started,

looking at definitions, finding sources.

If that doesn't sound convoluted, I

don't know what is. But it's the same

way people go about living lives they

end up not liking but never really

addressing. I remember once hearing

about, back in those late 60's days, two

conflicting ends of the same story, more

or less, and it being both contradictory

but parallel. Yes, sourcing or making

reference to the same sort of person,

each. The Vietnam War was raging  -

you don't know what that means by

just reading that here,  nor would you

be able to understand the weird and

psychological parallax it brings forth.

In photography, they define that, 'parallax,'

as the displacement of an object because

of the position of the viewer. That in

itself, with the confines of photography,

is a weird and curious concept, but worse

when you pull it out and apply it to life

too. In this case, as I said, the Vietnam

War, raging, had everyone spinning and

altering their positions on things  - even

though there was always the hard-core

center of people who remained intolerant

of opposition to whatever the Government

did. They weren't the ones getting churned

up by the process and the course of the war,

so their points were, most certainly, to be

looked down upon  -  there were Elks Halls

and Legion Halls full of those 'My Country,

Right or Wrong' types, (as if it were a question.

I'd always answer, 'Wrong!' But they were

never asking; it was more just a declaration).

So, they began this process by which the

soldiers ('the Boys') fighting over there

could, with there earnings, in whatever

manner, buy a new car, while there, at

home, and have it delivered to their home,

as a new car, while they were still in

Vietnam. It was a totally bizarre, and

chimerical, scheme, one obviously worked

out and masterminded by some devilish

military-benefits manager. It produced

the effect, often, of cars being delivered

to the waiting-driveways, at home, where

Mom and Dad and Sis were still living,

and where now Bobbie's new car was in

the driveway, waiting for him, when he

returned from Vietnam. On the other

hand  - and at the very same time  -  there

were countless cases (I myself knew of

3) of really depressed guys, after being

drafted and notified of their 'to be sent to

Vietnam' date, putting their beloved cars,

hot rodded or not, up for sale ('For Sale,

going to Vietnam, '64 Chevy Impala...'),

or putting them into some form of long-term

cold storage, whether in Dad's garage or

not. Going back to that first case, the

problem would arise when Bobbie did

not return. I never knew if there was a

debt-forgiveness loan benefit in this deal

or not, but it seems to me that a lot of

new cars probably went orphaned. Maybe

Dad or perhaps Sis got them. I don't know.

Nowadays anyway, I think if you die in

combat in any of these skirmish-wars

going on now, your survivor gets like a

million dollars, or some crazy-rich amount,

And this is for a volunteer operation that

the recruit has opted for, a sort of last-resort

employment now with vast levels of benefits.

And once again, (no one even recognizing it)

it's the devilish government enticing its 

own minions in.

-

But such was the situation long about

1968  -  there were a sorts of enticements

for going to Vietnam with a smile instead

of a smirk. That being but one. I stayed

way far from all that, as I've related, 

pounding my furied fists in my own 

way, from e11th street, nobly doing 

my, and then our, part  - as my efforts 

spread  -  in getting people up and out 

of all that and on their way to Canada. 

It soon became the stuff of nightmare 

and legend, an all engrossing 'war' 

which turned out to be no more than

words on the stateside of things  -  to 

which people now attach the noblest 

of motives, when in reality the entire 

crux of the matter was that the increasing 

national perversion was heading towards

an abyss wide open and held open by 

the society, but without ever first 

having been thought through

or sourced. Philosophy, of course, 

being a sore subject for the average 

Joe. As I noted in the opening, doing 

something without first getting through 

the preliminaries of what it is you're 

doing  -  sourcing first the impetus 

and/or genesis of why you are doing 

it  -  is a deadly mistake. In this case,

repeated 58,000 times, and that's 

only 'our' side, as the schmucks 

would put it.

-

On one hand, with the car-buy trick, 

you are ascribing materialistic 

motivations to a very spiritual 

moment -   killing another person. 

Wordlessly, and as lethally as slitting

their throat. It was pretty much an 

ungodly maneuver, what was being 

done.  But, frankly, I never saw too 

many tears being shed. I saw, instead, 

all the usual schluppy stuff  -  pride 

and sadness in sacrifice. Bravery 

and valor  -  supposedly  -  being 

exercised in the means of War. (No 

one yet called it 'warfare', nor were 

the soldiers then called 'warriors'. 

Those are all later language tricks 

for the sort of meaningless days 

we have now). Another constant 

and all-present conundrum, and

a very American one as well, is

when you are killing FOR God, in

the fashion of a crusade, or chasing

righteousness and value (as we 

supposedly were), does that make 

it correct? 'God' then gives it the

needed stamp of approval? OR, is

the really bad part when you are 

killing 'Godlessly, just wiping out 

people from afar, B-52's from the 

sky, destroying in huge swaths, and 

burning and destroying Nature 

by lethal chemical means, and for

profit no less? Is that then met with 

non-approval, or the same sort of 

approval for justified ends, and 

how does any peon make that 

decision, or conclusion? It seemed 

to me that the justification for 

resistance was in that 'making your

own decision'  -  which, after all, 

is the Freedom you are so blithely 

fighting over, if not for. Is it not?

People, and the usual nipple-sucking

historians who do this stuff, call the

grouping of years, perhaps, say, 

1964-1974, 'the Vietnam Era.' I

never knew where they got their 

information on that one. In fact, 

if not in essence too, there were 

at least three Vietnam Wars. Each

with its own identifiable level of

intensity and bring  - even the Vietnam 

guys, if you've ever witnessed it, they

end up arguing in disagreement with

each other over the issue. "64? That

was nothing, You guys had it easy."

And the retort, "69? You guys were all

screwed up, no one knowing that they

were even doing any more." And on 

it goes, until they each pull out their

address and numbers books to see if 

they both had the same phone number 

for Lt. Calley. In the beginning years, 

this crap was all talked about with 

high-minded words and the motives 

of 'right' and truth and justice. No 

different than anything said around 

the globe by any of five national

liberation movements  -  from 

Brazzaville and Congo to Singapore 

to Greece to Spain to Selma. It's 

all trash talk. But is the usual 

high-minded stuff that Americans like

to spout but which they abhor and hate

if from the mouth of some national

liberation movement hack somewhere.

It's goose and gander stuff, but the

equalization is never seen. I was in New

York City partially to remain invisible to

all this, myself  -  my own conclusions

had been made, and the fields I'd seeded

for myself were only just then beginning

to sprout. I still had a lot to think about,

and I had yet a lot of time to do it.

Thankfully.