Labels

Saturday 26 March 2016

World Peace

Peace on earth would mean the end of civilization as we know it.  
~
 Joseph Heller 

Peace to all humanity, it's an interesting line, it could be a reality, and it's a dream. Also, it's probably not worth it or possible.

There is a poem, it talks about an empire that makes peace by making a desert and calling it peace. What this poem refers to is that a civilization or a place, is destroyed and then called peace, it means that peace is attained by destroying everything till only silence rules. There is no noise, and thus peace is attained. Peace can be attained like that, the destruction of everything.

Similarly, we can have peace, by stopping anyone who opposes peace, or what people believe is peace. However, that type of peace can only end in the crushing of others. If ten people are in a room together and nine are silent, but the tenth is noisy, if you get rid of the tenth, you have peace back into the room. Consequently, if you remove all that oppose peace, you will get peace, but is it worth it having the laurels of peace resting on the bodies of others?

A few generations ago, people didn't have as many opinions, it was a lot easier. However, do you know what, people where judged and forced into positions that they didn't really like, it wasn't perfect. Howbeit, the real catcher is this, we had more peace then. Why? Well it's because people weren't allowed to be diverse, so everyone was the same more or less, sure we had some differences, but now a days we have all these conflicting categories, making the world more divided, but more free. Is peace more important, or is freedom more important?

It is easy to talk about peace, but it's a different matter making it or defending. We can talk about laying arms down and not fighting, but like the old saying, if you want peace, prepare for war. Take for instance the recent Belgium bombing. The terrorist bombed the very heart of the UN, the so called keepers of peace, the famous paper tiger. Peace, was lost that day, because un-peaceful measures weren't put in place to defend the peace. There is a price for not assuring peace, and words are not the only thing that can keep peace.

Fundamentally, when you realize that people, don't believe in peace, or have total different mentality from peace, you do realize that to have peace, is a nice thought. Peace cannot be, sadly, always be established by holding hands with other. They have a total different mindset from oneself. Furthermore, what if others believe that they are truly fighting for peace, and you are just standing in their way? Maybe, in certain occasions they could have been convinced, but not in the time frame that it takes to stop them with force.

It's not so much that violence is the answer, but that if the peace that we desire is going to happen, there will be conflict of interest. This doesn't necessarily mean violence, but definitely disagreements will arise, causing unrest. The thing with World peace is that, peace was established twice, but two wars had to happen. Talk didn't create peace, but war. It's arrogant to think that we could have peace, when we can't negotiate a drive through on the highway without having road rage.

With peace, war only begets more war, but to not have war or conflict is to invite unrest. War is not the answer to peace, but neither is inaction. World peace is ambitious, it's good, but not necessarily realistic. As humans we are in a dilemma, to not stop someone would destroy your peace, but to stop them, is to destroy world peace. If we are at war with each other, world peace is lost. However, to not be at war with each other could be the very certain destruction of our homes. To long for world peace is good. However, seeing peace in one's mind is a step and so is: peace in the home, society, county, state, country, and if you have time, the world.

 At the end of the day. world peace is not how much we are doing to move in that direction, but what are you willing to do to get world peace.

No comments: