The "mwah-mwah" is not a political organization, but it is a political statement.  Easily dismissed as an empty gesture by a generous intellect.

   Considered in its political context by a less generous intellect, the "mwah-mwah" arises from that fragile relationship between the powerful and the weak.  A divide which in a simpler time was quickly located within the term: "the deserving and the undeserving."

    The "deserving" achieve their status by following a predetermined pattern of behavior toward a recognizable goal.  Here, there may be an A for effort, or even an A-plus in the form of something shiny.  For their part, the "undeserving" do not follow a predetermined pattern of behavior and as a result no goal of theirs is recognized as "deserved". 

     This analysis, though in some respects reasonable, is not accurate.  And I can say this as a consequence of observation.

    The truer picture, reflects an idea of the 'deserving' as increasingly self appointed.  The ancillaries of wealth, the robes of power, the sword of righteousness combine without reference to any particular pattern of behavior.  In another way, the goal is an end in itself.  It has become 'creative is without preamble', that butchery of 'being' so familiar to virus.

   The "mwah-mwah" in this truer context is a political assumption on the part of the "deserving".  It is characterized often by usurping the creativity and hard work of others.  In the classic Christian and Islamic standard it is a usury.  In the academic world it is plagiarism.  On the playground it is an unfairness.  In good company it is the defining feature of most epithets. 

   Once recognized, the "mwah-mwah" by itself is tolerable, humorous even, until it comes with a "Thank You Darling".  Then it is destructive because "deserving" has become that standard of "entitlement" which so often in history has led to a gestalt of bloodletting that quickly satisfies the many until worse comes along. 

Previous  Next