In which I learn a new word

(Note: many naughty words herein. Sometimes, there’s only one way of saying something. Warning duly delivered, those under the age of, etc., your mileage may vary.)

Cab Driver: Look out there; it’s a fucking coup d’état.
Sands: I can’t see, fuck-mook. I have no eyes.
— from Once Upon a Time in Mexico

I don’t really know whether it was Robert Rodriguez or perhaps Johnny Depp who first coined that particular word – Depp, apparently, ad-libbed some of his dialogue in the film – but I’ve come to appreciate in retrospect the usefulness and versatility of the word fuck-mook*. It takes the pejorative mook, used to describe the faceless extras that are plowed down by the dozen in martial arts and Hong Kong action films, and turns up the vitriol an appropriate and necessary notch. It also serves to amplify the connotation of mook – that of the generic human obstacle, too lacking in any personality or imagination to register on one’s consciousness as anything but, and useful only in their rapid disposal. The prefix fuck-, in this case, indicates an almost willing embrace of a fate over and above that – someone who has reached their pinnacle in mookdom, either through working their hardest and failing to arrive anywhere else, or through a cussed determination, unvarnished by a scrap of intelligence, to become such to those who honestly do have better things to do.

It would be very useful in, for example, describing some of the management at my current job. Ah, but wait!, you say. Management is not under consideration for mookdom, as they are in the positions of power, not obsequious subservience! Yes, quite a clever observation, however a) these are for the most part middle managers, and therefore about as useful as screen doors on a submarine, and b) they serve to prevent work from being done by those below (for none is done laterally), and recognized by those above.  Thus, fuck-mooks; thank you for playing.

Rolling Stone, of late, has some good political stories about fuck-mooks. John McCain is apparently rapidly retuning his teetering image to appeal solely to fuck-mooks – Matt Taibbi has the story, and it’s a very impressive rant. It does also serve to draw a distinction between the Republicans and Democrats that may previously have been located elsewhere. The GOP, for the past fifty years or so, has made a concerted effort to reach beyond its traditional core of fat cat corporate slime and court every single person of below-average intelligence** in the country…ones who would be quite willing to allow anything to happen to anyone beyond their own mailbox as long as they can have their (*sniff*) flag, their Bible, their SUV, and American Idol piped into their plasma screen TV. The only problem with this is, it’s a winning strategy. The number of chuckleheads out there is greater than the number of reasonable persons, and when truly motivated to do something destructive to the whole, such as, say, electing George W. Bush (or at the very least pretending to), they truly morph into fuck-mooks. It is these whom John McCain, formerly a “maverick”, is courting in his attempt to be President.

Many Democrats, particularly of the Daily Kos-type (also fuck-mooks themselves, but that’s a long story), have retaliated by embracing their own, now-created base: the educated “elite”. There is a despair at getting run by a bunch of dingbats for an extended period of time, as well as having your own party being so lacking in testicular fortitude that the only way you win anything is by sending in an Arkansas bubba who’ll not only act like them, but enact their policy as well. And you have to feel for them. How sad is it that being intelligent in any measure whatsoever is seen as “elite”, branding you as hopelessly out of touch with the majority of your own country? How sad is it that McCain is now a righty hate-monger, Obama is now a socialist, Hillary Clinton is now the champion of the lunch-bucket crowd, and Bob Barr is the new defender of the Constitution – and if you question any of this as transparent pandering or labelling, you’re tossed off as a “fringey” “kook”?

Right, back on topic. The point is that the opposite side is being fueled by not only marching morons, but proud marching morons – true fuck-mooks to the rest of us. Ignorance has been raised within to such a level that it is a higher calling, and intelligence is stigmatized as a sin – “elitism”, it’s now called. And this makes sense. When society has matured, it has done so by means of liberalism and progressivism. In the last century, conservatives championed things like slavery, voting restrictions, and “states’ rights”, all in the name of the Bible or “natural law” or similar, familiar-sounding arguments. The difference was that the money guys – the actual “elite” – were against them, because it got in the way of making money. Starting with Goldwater, and reaching its pinnacle with Reagan *spit*, the money guys wised up and realigned themselves with the yokels, because they realized – probably after watching things happen in Europe before WWII – that if you just spat out the same nonsense and didn’t back down from it regardless of how much it stank, you really could fool all of those people all of the time. The point was to transform anti-intellectualism into a siren call. Keep society from maturing and you keep them from progressing – and conservatives win.

This is why the opposite tack – progressives sucking back up to the Great Unwashed – doesn’t work***. The “wisdom of crowds” has marched on; it’s now seen mainly on the Intarnets****. Those left are the type that McCain is now tapping into – the point of Taibbi’s column.

(As an aside, when said this way, it’s easy to see the appeal of The Matrix as a sort of lefty dystopian fantasy…an entire population of fuck-mooks, too lacking to know they are being manipulated by unfeeling elites…all standing in the way of those who are intelligent enough to manipulate computers and cut themselves loose from the “strings” that others can’t see. More study needed here; this might lead into the third party/independent/secessionist wing of the progressive movement. At least, I hope it does.)

* The Urban Dictionary doesn’t do the term justice in its definition and therefore isn’t linked here.

** As I’ve mentioned at other times, it’s probably more accurate to describe such persons as being low in imagination rather than simply low in intelligence – unable to conceive any other states of being.

*** For more, read here.

**** Sorry, “Internet”. The “series-of-tubes” variations are Republican in nature (See: Stevens, Ted; Bush, G.W.; etc.) Which kinda proves my point, now that I think of it.


2 Responses

  1. […] June 22, 2008 by Mary Clyens Response to my brother’s post: […]

  2. I started to respond to this here, but it got way too long, so I cut and pasted it over on Free Silver.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: