Log in

No account? Create an account

The Past | The Previous

The Murder Meme

in what will, no doubt, prove to a bad idea (or at least one i regret tomorrow), i've come up with a new livejournal protest meme.

i came up with it while reading the post about the fbi showing up at a blogger's house. i thought to myself: this world is fucking uptight. kids can't write violence in schools. people can't say that they don't like presidents (or maybe prime ministers, but who knows about that). nintendo is suing someone who listed their games on a board related to the suicidegirls.com site. it's just getting out of hand. the world needs to chill. so i came up with a new meme to help the world chill.

usually, memes are stupid. lets be honest: what book do you like, music no one else has, if you can chew gum and walk, and when was the last time you had sex with your father. stuff like that.

this meme, is different.

this meme is about satire.

this meme is about picking yourself a world leader, and then describing how they were brutally murdered.

what you do is simple: you pick a world leader you don't like, and in a paragraph, give the rundown on how they were brutally murdered. we're talking the blood, the details, the screaming, and the giant pretzel shaped monster that rose out the sea and jammed its salted fist down the throat of a world leader, about really killing them.  then you put in your subject heading 'How to Brutally Murder ' so that google and all the other search engines can pick it up and share in your satirical wit and ability to write these things.

it is not, and this should be pretty damn obvious, about really killing anybody. it's a satire, and a satire is "a composition in verse or prose ridiculing vice or folly or lampooning individual(s)" and so your brutal murder should adhere to that concept in one form or another.

if you decide to do this meme, post the rules first, followed by your brutal murder.

if you're thinking this is a bad idea, well, maybe it is. i'm unsure on the intelligence behind it myself, but it kinda pisses me off, people being unable to write what they want. i mean, how ridiculous is that? now, in truth, i know this isn't much. it's a pretty small thing, but i hear there's this thing called a blogsphere, and i dream of a world where the net search engines are swimming in the satires that depict the brutal murders of world leaders.


( 7 Soaking Up Bandwidth — Soak Up Bandwidth )
(Deleted comment)
Oct. 27th, 2004 07:49 pm (UTC)
that's a nice safe choice.
Oct. 27th, 2004 08:13 pm (UTC)
Though I choose not to partake, as I have no intention of either testing the effectiveness of the system or of creating undue concern I do ask this one question. What would the livejournal response have been had anniesj substituted the name of former President Clinton for President Bush in her initial diatribe and then reported the same government response?

Both are protected by the same agency and the same laws restrict speech where threats to their well-being are concerned.

I just wonder...what's that page count on comments now, 20, 22?
Oct. 27th, 2004 08:40 pm (UTC)
well, the page count was up to 30 when i was there, but yeah, probably it would've been less. maybe.

but, that said, my response has little to do with it being bush. i've just been seeing a lot of things where lawyers have been bought out to stop something being printed. t-shirthell's christopher reeve shirt, the nintendo thing, the general watchfullness in schools, the author who got caught by the patriot act for the books she was checking out... the last bit was just when i finally decided to make a comment on it.
Oct. 27th, 2004 11:18 pm (UTC)
Like politics in this country the relationship between law enforcement and lawyers seems to have become polarized in an incredibly strained position. It seems that no one can be arrested without an attorney whispering wetly in their ear that their rights have been violated and that they deserve to be compensated. Similarly, no product goes to market without exhaustive research to ensure that it doesn't offend anyone because again, if any individual or group is even slightly taken aback they're going to show up in court seeking their payday.

I honestly haven't felt any change since 9-11 and the enactment of the patriot act. I am the sort of fellow that was being profiled before any of that occurred. On an East coast junket in August of 2001 I was pulled out of line three times at three different airports (including Boston's Logan) and subjected to further searches, hand-swabs, and the like. It didn't bother me then and it doesn't bother me when it happens now.

I too have my hot buttons. I guess that this particular tale just didn't hit any of them.

(Deleted comment)
Oct. 27th, 2004 11:27 pm (UTC)
A perfectly reasonable reaction but I'd touch on three points. First, if Secret Service agents had a discussion with Jesse Helms I doubt that he would have publicized the conversation Second, your outrage is based on the assumption that todays tale is itself not a fabrication. Finally, even assuming that the story as told is gospel the only character who mentioned any possible repercussions was the lawyer to whom the blogger ran.
Oct. 27th, 2004 09:18 pm (UTC)
heh, I just read your "How to Brutally Murder George W. Bush." and was about to comment with something along the lines of "you read that thing about the FBI turning up a some guys house, right?" but luckily I scrolled down to find the link and stumbled across this entry on the way.
Oct. 29th, 2004 05:02 am (UTC)
what can i say? i'm a real subtle guy ;)
( 7 Soaking Up Bandwidth — Soak Up Bandwidth )