Sociopath Community

 

 

A martyr to me is as successful as their ability to be the topic of conversation.

So anyone who dies ever is a martyr as long as someone talks about them?

 No, they have to die as some sort of sacrificial lamb towards the conversation. 

 I agree
But I don't agree that choosing public suicide accomplishes this goal. A viral video of a human on fire brings more atten to the human themself. A viral video that captures the injustice they protest could bring attention to the conversation without making it about themself because they selfishly choose to be imortalized with the cause.

See Robert Paulson.

God I fucking love this move. Once again this enhanced my point that death was brought onto Bob by an external force- the cops

Regardless of if anyone ever knows what principles they stood for, and whether their death impacted the cause in any way, just being dead and talked about qualifies as martyrdom? If that is the case that what is the point of having a word for martyrdom, it doesn't mean anything anymore since every single living thing will be a martyr one day, completely forgotten, and likely having very little impact on the world.

That's like saying there's no reason for the word "artist", "diva", or "celebrity" in that it denounces a means of getting attention. 

No one wants to think they died just screaming into a dark cave, they want their lives to have meant something.

Exactly. *He wants his life to have meant something* more than he wants to actually help the cause. I think the motivation of a martyr is important. Public suicide is not martyrdom because rather than really doing everything he could to bring attention to the cause he used it as an opportunity to be remembered.

post 2/2

PalePeach said: 

Turncoat said: 

PalePeach said: 

Turncoat said: 

PalePeach said: 

Turncoat said: 

Martyrdom can be stronger than a tyrant.

True, but is choosing to commit suicide really Martydom?

It can be yes, depending on how it's framed. 

Fight Club plays with this idea. 

Fantastic example. The narrator isn't comitting suicide for the purpose of drawing attention to himself, he is sacrificing himself because it is the only way to harm his enemy- who lives inside his head.

His enemy is himself and it's an expression of his own self loathing in a battle versus his Ego and Id (with Marla as the Superego).

He is a Martyr of Project Mayhem, and aimed to be dead to be the Jesus of a Credit Cardless Utopia he'd not live to see, all because he's inherently suicidal and wants it to mean something. 

I'll need to read the book.

It's in the narrative of the movie too. The focal points of those around him are a little funny as they try to play along with "the crazy person". 

Considering the Noir style it's presented in, it's fun for what few parts of "Unreliable Narration" they threw into the background. The book sells his insanity much more so, selling some sort of hyperactivity as an obvious symptom of his crashing psyche. 

Although the narrator- Tyler struggle is clearly representative of an internal struggle, the movie paints the final scenes as a fight between literal multiple identities which want different things more than as a metaphor for one conciousness that struggles with what he wants.

He's in such a fucked up MPD psychosis, every implication it shows without outright elaborating for us is straight weird when you Fridge Logic it. 

He however is a Martyr, and both mediums express his ultimate success in killing himself (the movie handles it real tongue in cheek).

It's in the narratives itself though, the demonizing of "fairy tales" and the idea of what permanence even means. If the narrator survived, Tyler Durden wouldn't have a name. Not even his own shit boss from his own shit job has a name, just a title that's presented as an obstacle. The fact that a name was given to him is in itself a death sentence, like Chloe the Cancer Patient. 

"Only in death will we have our own names since only in death are we no longer part of the effort. In death we become heroes." — Chuck Palahniuk

He really turns a lot of classically accepted conventions on their head, through the example of a crazy person. 

A martyr is someone who dies a victim, or as a consequence of fighting for what they believe in.

Yes, and the self-immolating monk qualifies. Who are you to say this isn't a victim dying for what they believe in?

Let me rephrase, a martyr isn't given a choice.

Was Jesus not a martyr? 

I covered this is the rest of the paragraph which you deleted here. "Death is brought upon them by external forces. A martyr either A) cannot escape death or B) has the option to escape only by turning on what they believe.

So Jesus isn't a martyr then? 

The monk had endless options and no person or situation forcing him to choose death.

Perhaps the direction that his beliefs twisted him made it apply as option B. 

Nobody brought death upon him, coming to conclusion "death is the only answer" when no one else pressured him to die is mental illness.

Circumstances did, his beliefs did, and the extent he felt that needed to be followed through on to make such a statement gave him no other choice. 

Is it meaningless to die symbolically? What other reasons are worth dying for other than raw sentiment? 

So he failed to bring attention to the issue from anyone except the people who are already addressing the issue, and that is somehow my fault because I hadn't already heard of the thing he was bringing attention to, before he did such a bang-up job of bring attention to himself instead of said issue.

Your ignorance isn't their fault. I don't blame math when my buddy can't do basic arithmetic. 

Just saying like, I could see them having a really well thought out rant if they're at that point of derealization. 

I'd love to hear it, but until then you aren't doing a very good job of convincing me that suicide is martyrdom.

Or rather that suicide can be martyrdom, not that it is martyrdom. 

It's about how good the PR is. If a heroic death can be swept under the rug then it's just a tragedy. 

If a monk choose to drink poison and die alone as a form of protest would this count as martyrdom?

Depending on how it's framed. 

How would you frame this as a martyr?

Imagine if that 'monk' were a celebrity of some sort? 

In this case I could see the monk becoming a sudo-religious figure of sorts, like  Ghandi. The monk in the video is not famous however. The most attention he every received was about the fact he publically killed himself- which once again brings attention away from his cause and instead to himself.

It still got us talking about it, even this far away from the problem. 

PalePeach said: 

A martyr to me is as successful as their ability to be the topic of conversation.

So anyone who dies ever is a martyr as long as someone talks about them?

 No, they have to die as some sort of sacrificial lamb towards the conversation. 

 I agree
But I don't agree that choosing public suicide accomplishes this goal. A viral video of a human on fire brings more atten to the human themself. A viral video that captures the injustice they protest could bring attention to the conversation without making it about themself because they selfishly choose to be imortalized with the cause.

You are aware that it's a cause related to monks in Vietnam, but you don't even know the monk's name. How is this an attention grab for said-monk and not for the cause he died for? 

If you were to look up his name you'd find stuff like this: 

Thích Quảng Đức:

After the self-immolation, the U.S. put more pressure on Diệm to re-open negotiations on the faltering agreement. Diệm had scheduled an emergency cabinet meeting at 11:30 on 11 June to discuss the Buddhist crisis which he believed to be winding down.

Following Quảng Đức's death, Diệm canceled the meeting and met individually with his ministers. Acting U.S. Ambassador to South Vietnam William Trueheart warned Nguyễn Đình Thuận, Diệm's Secretary of State, of the desperate need for an agreement, saying that the situation was "dangerously near breaking point" and expected Diệm would meet the Buddhists' five-point manifesto.

United States Secretary of State Dean Rusk warned the Saigon embassy that the White House would publicly announce that it would no longer "associate itself" with the regime if this did not occur.

The Joint Communiqué and concessions to the Buddhists were signed on 16 June.

Again, your ignorance doesn't take away from History itself any more than it being Math's fault when someone can't put two and two together. Just because it's not a part of your experiences doesn't make it any less meaningful towards the big picture. 

See Robert Paulson.

God I fucking love this move. Once again this enhanced my point that death was brought onto Bob by an external force- the cops

No way, his death was "In Project Mayhem", and if something else killed him it'd mean roughly the same thing. "The Pigs" are merely an obstacle, an occupation they can infiltrate like every other job in every other city they've reached. In time even they're a part of the 'Project' ("If anyone tries to interfere with Project Mayhem, cut off their balls").

They didn't even focus on the cops, he was just a martyr for the cause itself, an inspiration to keep going themselves from seeing that they could earn the right to have a name. 

He turns a lot of Eastern concepts into Cult-like doctrines, then describes it as visceral conceptual art to cover for the illogical portions. "Ikea Nesting Instinct" as Meditative Consumerism for example builds quite the contradiction, yet it goes on in plain sight and isn't too different from decorating a shrine. Even his portrayal on asceticism serves to laugh at it as he ultimately lives unrewarded in a den of filth, and eventually even requires "corporate sponsorship" to keep his Fight Club going.

The main character's very good at spiritual self-justification, and masochism for no logical reason keeps being his go-to. 

Regardless of if anyone ever knows what principles they stood for, and whether their death impacted the cause in any way, just being dead and talked about qualifies as martyrdom? If that is the case that what is the point of having a word for martyrdom, it doesn't mean anything anymore since every single living thing will be a martyr one day, completely forgotten, and likely having very little impact on the world.

That's like saying there's no reason for the word "artist", "diva", or "celebrity" in that it denounces a means of getting attention. 

No one wants to think they died just screaming into a dark cave, they want their lives to have meant something.

Exactly. *He wants his life to have meant something* more than he wants to actually help the cause.

The poetics of their ideas are the cause, they have to be as big as the ideas they're peacocking. 

Just look at cult leaders and celebrity icons, even those of lower castes try to emulate the glitz and glare that'll make people notice, and what's shinier and more identifiable than a loosely relatable death?

The movie "World's Greatest Dad" with Robin Williams really showcases this one (but sadly their trailer does not): 

I think the motivation of a martyr is important. Public suicide is not martyrdom because rather than really doing everything he could to bring attention to the cause he used it as an opportunity to be remembered.

Being remembered can cause changes though. Imagine if Martin Luther King for example lived long enough to pick up a drug habit or something, it'd be a different future. 

 1/2

Turncoat said: 

He however is a Martyr, and both mediums express his ultimate success in killing himself (the movie handles it real tongue in cheek).

It's in the narratives itself though, the demonizing of "fairy tales" and the idea of what permanence even means. If the narrator survived, Tyler Durden wouldn't have a name. Not even his own shit boss from his own shit job has a name, just a title that's presented as an obstacle. 

Oh shit. It never clicked for me that the narrator actually dies. I thought he just got super lucky and like, shot through his cheek or something but the shock of the decision to pull the trigger was enough to make the other personality go away. Is Marla even real then? I assumed she was a real human who put up with his fucked upness bc she's fucked up, but she does appear right after he shoots himself so is that just his dying brain showing another apparition to make the dying process easier?

---

"Only in death will we have our own names since only in death are we no longer part of the effort. In death we become heroes." — Chuck Palahniuk

---

He really turns a lot of classically accepted conventions on their head, through the example of a crazy person. 

I never knew before that Chuck Palahniuk was the author of Fight Club, but i saw a quote of his onyears ago and it had a very huge impact on my life so now i'm wondering wtf is with all the fucking syncronicity and coincidences in this world? Is anything real? Am I dead?

 

Let me rephrase, a martyr isn't given a choice.

Was Jesus not a martyr? 

I covered this is the rest of the paragraph which you deleted here. "Death is brought upon them by external forces. A martyr either A) cannot escape death or B) has the option to escape only by turning on what they believe.

So Jesus isn't a martyr then? 

Death was brought onto Jesus by the Romans, he had the option to save himself by saying he wasn't the son of God, but he stuck with his beliefs and was killed for it- which makes him a martyr.

 

Nobody brought death upon him, coming to conclusion "death is the only answer" when no one else pressured him to die is mental illness.

Circumstances did, his beliefs did, and the extent he felt that needed to be followed through on to make such a statement gave him no other choice. 

Did he tell you this himself?

 

So he failed to bring attention to the issue from anyone except the people who are already addressing the issue, and that is somehow my fault because I hadn't already heard of the thing he was bringing attention to, before he did such a bang-up job of bring attention to himself instead of said issue.

Your ignorance isn't their fault. I don't blame math when my buddy can't do basic arithmetic. 

I think your example drifts from my point here. By committing suicide he drew attention away from his cause and to himself instead. My example: We are talking about him now and I don't even know what he was protesting. I'm not blaming anyone for not explaining it to me. Your rebuttle to this was that I am ignorant because I don't see the issue in my daily life. Exactly. And that "martyr" didn't do anything to cure my ignorance either, instead I'm having this conversation with you about him and not whatever he died over.

Maybe you don't blame math when your buddy can't do arithmetic, but do you blame the math teacher who spent the entire class period taking selfies instead of teaching them arithmetic?

 

In this case I could see the monk becoming a sudo-religious figure of sorts, like  Ghandi. The monk in the video is not famous however. The most attention he every received was about the fact he publically killed himself- which once again brings attention away from his cause and instead to himself.

It still got us talking about it, even this far away from the problem. 

 We aren't talking about the problem though. We are talking about Fight Club and a man in Vietnam (apparently) who's desire to be remembered outweighed his ability to make any meaningful change.

PalePeach said:

Is Marla even real then?

Loose evidence suggests that she's not. 

All the food she eats are from already deceased people, and the majority of the narrator's practical survival strategies are reflected in her way more strongly. She has no ties to anyone and lives completely off of other people's stuff (like selling other people's laundry). From her being so self-critical though there's a real "finger on the eject switch" issue, and that's how and why they play with the idea of her "fucking Tyler Durden" while otherwise trying to keep the superego from being "in the know" about these crazy manic plans being made. The Superego's sad enough to sit around doing nothing and cramming tons of pills all sad, and Tyler's cool with pills and crazy stunts which plays together in ways that the self-preserving narrator is left out of almost entirely (blacking out essentially while those two joyride). 

Whatever apartment she lives in (that Tyler just happens to know the address of) ends up being a story of no consequence as well, and a bunch of other Marla scenes just play strangely. She can even WALK INTO HEAVY ONCOMING TRAFFIC without dying, masking it with some emo-poetics about how "Marla's philosophy of life is that she might die at any moment. The tragedy, she said, was that she didn't". Even when she shows up initially is right when 'the narrator' is meant to feel guilty about what he's doing (after he finally gets some sleep, providing the energy for his issues), her visage a direct reflection of the problem: "Her Lie Reflected My Lie". 'Tyler' wanted none of that, he just liked fucking with it. 

Even at the restaurant, his goons at that point of The Project are essentially trained to play along with him. They do so even earlier when him and Tyler have conversations in front of them, their expressions are intentionally telling, especially when it comes to where their eyes are going and what they say. The uncertainty and eye-conversations are 1/3 the way towards Roman Polanski's 'Rosmary's Baby's' levels of it, even just with random nobodies like the woman at the pawn shop. 

Strangely too, 'Marla Singer' has a name. No other women have names other than Chloe. 

PalePeach said: 

---

"Only in death will we have our own names since only in death are we no longer part of the effort. In death we become heroes." — Chuck Palahniuk

---

He really turns a lot of classically accepted conventions on their head, through the example of a crazy person. 

I never knew before that Chuck Palahniuk was the author of Fight Club, but i saw a quote of his onyears ago and it had a very huge impact on my life so now i'm wondering wtf is with all the fucking syncronicity and coincidences in this world? Is anything real? Am I dead?

Yeah this dude's got to have a pretty weird head to write this shit. The writing style's super choppy and all over the place, but it works really well for demonstrating the tone and mindset of how the narrator currently is. The narrative style itself actually takes the idea of reading speed and text formatting into account. 

Let me rephrase, a martyr isn't given a choice.

Was Jesus not a martyr? 

I covered this is the rest of the paragraph which you deleted here. "Death is brought upon them by external forces. A martyr either A) cannot escape death or B) has the option to escape only by turning on what they believe.

So Jesus isn't a martyr then? 

Death was brought onto Jesus by the Romans, he had the option to save himself by saying he wasn't the son of God, but he stuck with his beliefs and was killed for it- which makes him a martyr.

That bitch can walk on water and conjure food and beverage, he had options. There were people living to the age of 500 and everything back then. 

Nobody brought death upon him, coming to conclusion "death is the only answer" when no one else pressured him to die is mental illness.

Circumstances did, his beliefs did, and the extent he felt that needed to be followed through on to make such a statement gave him no other choice. 

Did he tell you this himself?

He didn't have to, his ideas live on. 

In this case I could see the monk becoming a sudo-religious figure of sorts, like  Ghandi. The monk in the video is not famous however. The most attention he every received was about the fact he publically killed himself- which once again brings attention away from his cause and instead to himself.

It still got us talking about it, even this far away from the problem. 

 We aren't talking about the problem though. We are talking about Fight Club and a man in Vietnam (apparently) who's desire to be remembered outweighed his ability to make any meaningful change.

Everything's connected. 

 2/2

Turncoat said: 

PalePeach said: 

A martyr to me is as successful as their ability to be the topic of conversation.

So anyone who dies ever is a martyr as long as someone talks about them?

 No, they have to die as some sort of sacrificial lamb towards the conversation. 

 I agree
But I don't agree that choosing public suicide accomplishes this goal. A viral video of a human on fire brings more atten to the human themself. A viral video that captures the injustice they protest could bring attention to the conversation without making it about themself because they selfishly choose to be imortalized with the cause.

You are aware that it's a cause related to monks in Vietnam,

bold of you to assume, I didn't know that until reading that very sentence. For all I know he commit sui for BLM

but you don't even know the monk's name. How is this an attention grab for said-monk and not for the cause he died for? 

Because it is a video of himself and not of what he was protesting that reached me. His face, his image has reached me over here in America, with absolutely no hint of whatever drove him to sacrifice himself ever mentioned during the act.

If you were to look up his name you'd find stuff like this: 

Thích Quảng Đức:
After the self-immolation, the U.S. put more pressure on Diệm to re-open negotiations on the faltering agreement. Diệm had scheduled an emergency cabinet meeting at 11:30 on 11 June to discuss the Buddhist crisis which he believed to be winding down.

Following Quảng Đức's death, Diệm canceled the meeting and met individually with his ministers. Acting U.S. Ambassador to South Vietnam William Trueheart warned Nguyễn Đình Thuận, Diệm's Secretary of State, of the desperate need for an agreement, saying that the situation was "dangerously near breaking point" and expected Diệm would meet the Buddhists' five-point manifesto.

United States Secretary of State Dean Rusk warned the Saigon embassy that the White House would publicly announce that it would no longer "associate itself" with the regime if this did not occur.

The Joint Communiqué and concessions to the Buddhists were signed on 16 June.

Oh look, you a living breathing alive person, have brought more to my attention about the situation than Thích Quảng Đức ever did. Yes some people received the message apparently, but you typing that right there ^^^ proves my point that there are ways other than suicide to bring attention to an issue. Thích Quảng Đức chose suicide because he wanted to be remembered when people remember the issue, not because it is the most effective method to bring attention to the issue. You only even looked up his name because I said suicide is an ineffective form of protest, not because his actions worked in bringing the information to you.

Again, your ignorance doesn't take away from History itself any more than it being Math's fault when someone can't put two and two together. Just because it's not a part of your experiences doesn't make it any less meaningful towards the big picture. 

You seem to have misunderstood my point. I'm not saying what I know or am aware of determines what is meaningful, I'm saying his goal of bringing attention to his caused failed because commiting suicide took attention away from the cause and directed it at himself. I used myself as an example because i am a human who received more information about this person than the topic he was trying to spread information about.

See Robert Paulson.

God I fucking love this move. Once again this enhanced my point that death was brought onto Bob by an external force- the cops

No way, his death was "In Project Mayhem", and if something else killed him it'd mean roughly the same thing.

yes, if he died of a bomb or in a fight or something he would still be a martyr, because he was killed by an external force. If bob decided to stand on a street corner and shoot himself while calling people snowflakes he would not have been a martyr- unless killing himself had been an "assignment" for Project Mayhem. In this case, the assignment would be the external force driving death. 

A human coming to their own conclusion to kill themself is not a martyr just because they sad it was "for" a cause. A stalker once killed herself "for" Paula Abdul. No one told her to, she just decided to. I would not consider her a martyr either.

 

No one wants to think they died just screaming into a dark cave, they want their lives to have meant something.

Exactly. *He wants his life to have meant something* more than he wants to actually help the cause.

The poetics of their ideas are the cause, they have to be as big as the ideas they're peacocking. 

"I have to be remembered by any means necessary. I care very much about this issue and I need people to forever associate me with it"

Just look at cult leaders and celebrity icons, even those of lower castes try to emulate the glitz and glare that'll make people notice, and what's shinier and more identifiable than a loosely relatable death?

Did you just make a 180 pivot and start agreeing with me?

 

I think the motivation of a martyr is important. Public suicide is not martyrdom because rather than really doing everything he could to bring attention to the cause he used it as an opportunity to be remembered.

Being remembered can cause changes though. Imagine if Martin Luther King for example lived long enough to pick up a drug habit or something, it'd be a different future. 

 Martin Luther King was shot, he didn't commit sui on stage.

Turncoat said: 

 

So Jesus isn't a martyr then? 

Death was brought onto Jesus by the Romans, he had the option to save himself by saying he wasn't the son of God, but he stuck with his beliefs and was killed for it- which makes him a martyr.

That bitch can walk on water and conjure food and beverage, he had options. 

He believed that was God's plan and he wasn't going to defy the plan... (Or he was a very passionate human and retellings of the stories exaggerated a wee teensy bit.)

In this case I could see the monk becoming a sudo-religious figure of sorts, like  Ghandi. The monk in the video is not famous however. The most attention he every received was about the fact he publically killed himself- which once again brings attention away from his cause and instead to himself.

It still got us talking about it, even this far away from the problem. 

 We aren't talking about the problem though. We are talking about Fight Club and a man in Vietnam (apparently) who's desire to be remembered outweighed his ability to make any meaningful change.

Everything's connected. 

PalePeach said: 

 2/2

Turncoat said: 

PalePeach said: 

A martyr to me is as successful as their ability to be the topic of conversation.

So anyone who dies ever is a martyr as long as someone talks about them?

 No, they have to die as some sort of sacrificial lamb towards the conversation. 

 I agree
But I don't agree that choosing public suicide accomplishes this goal. A viral video of a human on fire brings more atten to the human themself. A viral video that captures the injustice they protest could bring attention to the conversation without making it about themself because they selfishly choose to be imortalized with the cause.

You are aware that it's a cause related to monks in Vietnam,

bold of you to assume, I didn't know that until reading that very sentence. For all I know he commit sui for BLM

It's, uh, in his video's title?

Is it bold these days to assume you'd read the OP? 

but you don't even know the monk's name. How is this an attention grab for said-monk and not for the cause he died for? 

Because it is a video of himself and not of what he was protesting that reached me. His face, his image has reached me over here in America, with absolutely no hint of whatever drove him to sacrifice himself ever mentioned during the act.

It doesn't take much to find it. 

If you were to look up his name you'd find stuff like this: 

Thích Quảng Đức:
After the self-immolation, the U.S. put more pressure on Diệm to re-open negotiations on the faltering agreement. Diệm had scheduled an emergency cabinet meeting at 11:30 on 11 June to discuss the Buddhist crisis which he believed to be winding down.

Following Quảng Đức's death, Diệm canceled the meeting and met individually with his ministers. Acting U.S. Ambassador to South Vietnam William Trueheart warned Nguyễn Đình Thuận, Diệm's Secretary of State, of the desperate need for an agreement, saying that the situation was "dangerously near breaking point" and expected Diệm would meet the Buddhists' five-point manifesto.

United States Secretary of State Dean Rusk warned the Saigon embassy that the White House would publicly announce that it would no longer "associate itself" with the regime if this did not occur.

The Joint Communiqué and concessions to the Buddhists were signed on 16 June.

Oh look, you a living breathing alive person, have brought more to my attention about the situation than Thích Quảng Đức ever did. Yes some people received the message apparently, but you typing that right there ^^^ proves my point that there are ways other than suicide to bring attention to an issue. Thích Quảng Đức chose suicide because he wanted to be remembered when people remember the issue, not because it is the most effective method to bring attention to the issue. You only even looked up his name because I said suicide is an ineffective form of protest, not because his actions worked in bringing the information to you.

Again, your ignorance doesn't take away from History itself any more than it being Math's fault when someone can't put two and two together. Just because it's not a part of your experiences doesn't make it any less meaningful towards the big picture. 

You seem to have misunderstood my point. I'm not saying what I know or am aware of determines what is meaningful, I'm saying his goal of bringing attention to his caused failed because commiting suicide took attention away from the cause and directed it at himself. I used myself as an example because i am a human who received more information about this person than the topic he was trying to spread information about.

You're mostly reflecting on how it didn't have you put down your chips until it was spoonfed to you. 

See Robert Paulson.

God I fucking love this move. Once again this enhanced my point that death was brought onto Bob by an external force- the cops

No way, his death was "In Project Mayhem", and if something else killed him it'd mean roughly the same thing.

yes, if he died of a bomb or in a fight or something he would still be a martyr, because he was killed by an external force. If bob decided to stand on a street corner and shoot himself while calling people snowflakes he would not have been a martyr- unless killing himself had been an "assignment" for Project Mayhem. In this case, the assignment would be the external force driving death. 

It'd likely have lost a lot of the poetics, but in theory... considering how freeform their assignments for Project Mayhem are, and that Bob was a former TV personality for steroids with a well known name? 

A human coming to their own conclusion to kill themself is not a martyr just because they sad it was "for" a cause. A stalker once killed herself "for" Paula Abdul. No one told her to, she just decided to. I would not consider her a martyr either.

Well yeah his PR didn't spur some #MeToo movement. 

If he were presented in a more sympathetic light while she were presented as a monster he could have been taken as a martyr. 

Exactly. *He wants his life to have meant something* more than he wants to actually help the cause.

The poetics of their ideas are the cause, they have to be as big as the ideas they're peacocking

"I have to be remembered by any means necessary. I care very much about this issue and I need people to forever associate me with it"

Just look at cult leaders and celebrity icons, even those of lower castes try to emulate the glitz and glare that'll make people notice, and what's shinier and more identifiable than a loosely relatable death?

Did you just make a 180 pivot and start agreeing with me?

No, my point is that it's about PR. PR doesn't have to be solely about self-promotion, the imagery could just as easily be BLM paraphernalia for instance.

I think the motivation of a martyr is important. Public suicide is not martyrdom because rather than really doing everything he could to bring attention to the cause he used it as an opportunity to be remembered.

Being remembered can cause changes though. Imagine if Martin Luther King for example lived long enough to pick up a drug habit or something, it'd be a different future. 

 Martin Luther King was shot, he didn't commit sui on stage.

Not the point, the point's more about the idea that lives beyond them, succeeds them. If MLK lived long enough to do something heinous, he'd be remembered differently.

Therein is the power of "Martyrdom".

alePeach said: 

Turncoat said: 

So Jesus isn't a martyr then? 

Death was brought onto Jesus by the Romans, he had the option to save himself by saying he wasn't the son of God, but he stuck with his beliefs and was killed for it- which makes him a martyr.

That bitch can walk on water and conjure food and beverage, he had options. 

He believed that was God's plan and he wasn't going to defy the plan... (Or he was a very passionate human and retellings of the stories exaggerated a wee teensy bit.)

But he was God according to the story, just in a half-human form that wasn't subject to his timeless state (hence why he could talk to himself without time traveling). 

What I don't get is how Jesus didn't know every single detail of his own life in advance by birthright, considering God before divinely raping Mary and daring to call her a Saint after the fact should have known all there was to know about time and space before spawning the creature. 

Jesus' life really screams "puppet theater" to me, except Jesus was the only one on strings. His death was of no real consequence.