A Clarification Of Kumbaya

Peace is not unity in similarity but unity in diversity, in the comparison and conciliation of differences. ~ Mikhail Gorbachev

We walked together hand in hand making a better world. However, it got tough when someone wanted to use the bathroom, walking through doors, and especially eating; When your hands are holding other hands. What we did though, was usually just go head first into food or taking turns feeding each other. ~ The logs of someone who took Kumbaya for real.

When people picture a perfect world, they usually imagine a world where the whole of humanity is united as one. While a nice ideal to be united in all, we need people to disagree. Disagreeing is healthy. It doesn't necessarily mean that you hate one another, but you have a difference of opinion. It's good. If everyone agrees swimming with sharks, it would be a very bad day, even if it means that all humanity is united.

Although disagreement can be a good thing, it can sometimes be quite useless. Taking for instance any political system in a country. They have the Left and they have the Right. That's good and it's healthy. The idea is that, they both pull on their sides to create a balance. However, what happens instead, they hate each other. No doubt about it. There is nothing professional in it. So they just attack each other whether either one has a good or bad idea. They attack not for the sake of good sense, but for the sake of attacking. 

This is where having unity would be good.However, having unity to the hilt, is basically a cheap YA novel that people seem to turn out more rapidly than tax cuts. Having unity or Kumbaya is a good idea, but in small amounts is better.

It would be like how you can have different ideas with cars with other people, but you have a united front together that you both agree that running over people is not polite.

People prate about unity, and it is good, but really it's a bit overated. Unity would mean that we would be united together. United in doing the dishes together, united taking out the trash, united in ironing clothes, and so and so forth. We don't need to be united, we only have to agree on a few topics. And really else, we can disagree about everything else as long as we agree on the more important things.

Having unity is a great thing, but like everything it cannot be an extreme. For extremes are dangerous. Too much of a good thing is bad. If we have so much unity we will not have diversity. When people long for things, they are not always really sure what they want. Furthermore, a united world is not something we want, for it is a world that the majority persecute the minority or vice versa.

To sum it up, all we really need is a unity that we can disagree and agree. By this unity, we do not pull out swords and start chopping at each other. We may disagree, but only with words do we battle. Despite that, one is not as naïve as to believe, that humans just communicate with words, but also in deed and action.

Unity may come to the world, but if it does, it will surely be different from what people believe what it should be. Most likely, if unity came, those that long for it would oppose it, as it would not be what they perceive it to be. For unity is not the unification of every field, but the ability to solve things peacefully, so that we do not fracture, or destroy the peace that we enjoy.

 In the mean time though, settling for absolute unity in some topics would probably be all one can ask for now: a policy of quality over quantity. Nevertheless, whether we agree on what we should be united is questionable.