We are all Rambo

by C. Kem
December 3rd, 2014
I am a survivalist.
I will not call myself a "prepper", to me that is the "soccer mom definition" of EXACTLY what I am- a
survivalist.
Too often people will compare people like me, survivalists, as radicals, racists, militants and even
"home-grown domestic terrorists". And truly the definition of survivalist is so fine, so detailed yet so broad,
any such classification is not just wrong, but sladerous. It is uncalled for, it is unjustified.
A survivalist is not a radical, we just want to survive in a crisis. Just like "preppers" or "soccer moms".
A survivalist could be a racist, but you will find racism in nearly every political and social group out there,
no matter what country you go to.
A survivalist could be a militant, but then look at the same statement before- you will find that in almost
every political and social group out there, no matter what country you go to. Not just survivalists.
As for "home-grown domestic terrorists"...hey, I remember when I was a kid. Dennis the Menace...step
aside kiddo, 'cause I put you to shame! LOL!
But Rambo? Seriously, is a survivalist "Rambo"? Actually, they could be. Just as anyone else could be.
But let us talk about Rambo. Who was he? Where was he? Why was he like he was?
Rambo was viewed pretty much as a homeless radical militant looking for trouble
Of course Wikipedia feeds into that, saying Rambo
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rambo), is used to describe a person who is reckless,
disregards orders, uses violence to solve problems, solely enters deadly situations, and is exceptionally
tough and aggressive., referencing that statement to a quote from Oxford Dictionaries (Source:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Rambo) which is not only inaccurately quoted in
Wikipedia, but the Oxford Dictionaries definition not much better, claiming its An exceptionally tough,
aggressive man.
The story line however tells the difference, really.
Who was he?
John Rambo was a veteran of the Vietnamese Conflict in search of a friend he served with. He finds his
friend has past away, and is soon harassed and arrested by the towns sheriff, who tries to force Rambo
from the sheriffs cozy little town. Rambo does not pay much attention to this, and he returns to the same
town (in the movie and as a movie set, Hope Washington). The sheriff of course arrests Rambo again,
and the events escalate.
John Rambo, though a fictional character, only brought to Hollywood a problem that persists to this very
day- police abusing citizens.
So in this movie reference, the finger is repeatedly pointed at Rambo. I suppose if he met the grooming
and dress standards of a small town cop, this would never have happened. I suppose if he just buckled
under to a cops demands, this would never have happened. Or perhaps if the cop did not judge a person
based on their physical appearance as readily, it would not have turned out like it did. Then look at the
abuse committed by the deputies. Perhaps if Rambo was still arrested and the deputies were not making
fun of his injuries and inflicting treatment that even back then was considered cruel and unlawful, Rambo

would not have found a reason to kill any of the cops. After he found his best friend died, he just wanted
to be left alone.
Brown and Garner
Now look at the recent events in Ferguson and New York City. Michael Brown and Eric Garner, both
killed. What did Michael Brown do? He was caught on video doing a strong-arm robbery for cigarettes,
and was seen getting violent with a store clerk, and then described by the officer, Darrin Wilson, as
assaulting Officer Wilson. All the factors point in that direction. Brown tried to take Officer Wilsons gun
away, and then charged at him. This was not caught on video, but the robbery from moments before was,
lending credibility to Officer Wilsons case. Even I, being critical of cops, agree with that.
Eric Garners arrest, on the other hand, was caught on video. He was selling Loosies- individual
cigarettes, tax free. And the cops killed him. Unlike Brown, Garner did not go after Officer Pantaleo,
instead he had his back to Officer Pantaleo; the officer jumped him from behind then tackled him to the
ground. And again, this IS on video. Even the New York Medical Examiner has ruled Garner's death a
homicide, stating the cause of death was "compression of neck (chokehold), compression of chest and
prone positioning during physical restraint by police." (Source:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/03/justice/new-york-grand-jury-chokehold/index.html)
And as stated by the medical examiner, acute & chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and hypertensive
cardiovascular disease as contributing factors in Garner's death. But that somehow does not seem to
justify ignoring Garners plea that he cannot breathe. And now he is dead. For selling cigarettes, or
because the cops involved did not know their limits? Does this justify the police using an illegal choke
hold?
Us
Now look at a lot of the police abuse that happens across this nation. These two events happened and
the media caught them. But they are only two. For these two I bet we are talking about hundreds that go
on without the media being the wiser. And if the media does not catch it, do you?
You see, that is where Rambo came from. He came from real life. He came from a novel turned into a
movie by Hollywood, yes, but he came from the first hand experiences "discontent" society has with our
so-called "peace officers". Rambo, as a character, took violent means only when pushed to the brink.
Garner did nothing whatsoever.
Now reflecting back on John Rambo, he himself had impairments, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
particularly. Personally I think that while Hollywoods intent on bringing a very real impairment that a
sizeable percentage of Americans (veterans and non-veterans alike) have to public spotlight, if that is
what they attempted, was well intended. But if anything it succeeded in provoking a fear in the public eye
of people with PTSD, labeling them in the public eye as a threat, something which they are not.
In Rambos case his PTSD was worsened by how he was mistreated by the police. Rambo really was
more of a kind, compassionate man that wanted a break from a horrible war he was pushed in and forced
to live with in his memories.
When I compare the differences and similarities, we can see that the men were, well, men. They had
impairments (unsure about Browns impairment). But most importantly their rights were abused by the
cops.
In closing
While I understand that John Rambo is only fiction, his image is very real. And truly, John Rambo really is
no different than many of us. He was just tired of being bullied by a bad cop. He was not reckless. He
did not disregard orders (actually, he received his impairment by following orders). He only used violence

to solve problems because he had no apparent options. Was he exceptionally tough and aggressive? I
suppose thats a matter of opinion. The definitions given by Wikipedia, Oxford Dictionaries and held the
public in general to me are merely conjectures- opinions based on ignorance and lack of understanding.
And just as much as we can all end up being another Eric Warner, we are still, truly, Rambo.