to rebel or not to live

a rebel, in newspeak it is one who has no ideals
but in history you can see rebels all over the place
and they all had a mission a goal and a reason to rebel
they never rebeled to be one.

marx was one and he did not take actions because he did not feel it was ready
a rebel against the rebels who had a love for a riot rather than filosophy and so i would not think of them
as true filosophical rebels !

a rebel without a cause is nothing but a roiteer and a loss to sociaty and peace !

the idealistic rebel will not act untill the moment is there,
no scedual, but instinctive reaction.

or well that is what i think and i can see in the pages of history
but most people follow the newspeak rebel
one like james dean, without a cause... that is not a rebel, it is a waste of life and energy.
a cry for attention

a true rebel would be thoughtful and honnest
but that has been a word changed by newspeak

thoughtful would answere to, EGO
honnest only to the lie !

one day i would
rebel
and i would
kill, even if need be, the ones i love
just to rebel against your addiction to life
but as some form of comfort
i'd kill you to spare you the torture ahead.

i'd kill my parents so they would not be witness to my death
that would be so disrespectful.

i'd kill my kids, so they would not fall prey to the voltures and hyenas that scour the land
to kill the greedy would mean genocide
and would be much more voilence than needed.

rebels these days have little or no principles or rules,
they rebel against rules
even their own
which is sad, and a sign of social decay
and thus a worthy cause to rebel against.

know i'd rather kill you
cause that would mean
you've been martyred
it would be so much better than to die a bastard
or to die invein

btw,
the kill is not needed
when you just follow (that would require independent thinking..... it is the paradox you have to live with)
the monster !