POINT OF POINTLESSNESS

I’ve been brief in my postings lately, largely as a result of distraction and news fatigue. This afflicts me semipermanently on certain topics -- the endless madness of Northern Ireland and Israel and Palestine -- but cyclically for current events in general; periods in which I read the news intensely, clipping articles and writing with passion, lead to periods in which I’m overwhelmed by surrender and lassitude.

The two are related. Ireland and Israel have alienated my interest through disappointment: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me since the dawn of time, shame on me. But it’s pointless to care about people who willfully resist resolution, who embrace bloodshed not just by fighting but by regularly embracing the leaders preventing them from ending that bloodshed.

That’s sort of where I am with larger events, too, as the United States consistently embraces not just madness and bloodshed, but the leaders that bring it to the point of more. President Bush is a huge fan of President Reagan, whose administration gave us the outrage of Iran-Contra, so it’s not really a surprise that the country finds itself in another ideological war of choice. The war in Iraq ultimately represents the worst and most illegal policework -- knocking down a door to look for evidence that justifies knocking down the door -- but the majority of Americans don’t care (even though Bush’s attorney general has a parallel lack of regard for domestic procedure). And Bush has a goal of raising $170 million for the upcoming election, even though he has no Republican opposition, but no one has even asked him why, much less expressed much concern over it. The guy who lost the popular vote last time will spend stratospheric amounts of money to win this time, and he stands an excellent chance of succeeding.

There’s the crux of it, that it’s hard to keep caring in the face of tremendous indifference.

I will care again. But it’ll be a “long, hard slog” until November 2004. I have to conserve a little strength.