You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: "For The People" (poem) >>> The Law, For It Whom?
Maybe you are right @quillfire
Hidden within subconscious there is an insatiable desire for conflict...war is inevitable...Its a necessary evil....
Look around you, the world is on fire.
War is not about to begin, It has already started...
From Zoroastrian point of view...
The war between good and evil had always been, ever since the inception of time...
So why avoid war???
Let it be the cleanser....
To grow something new, the field must be set on fire first!
Good points, but can we really say this in a modern context, war is actually becoming less likely as time goes on. Can we imagine France and Germany, or Spain and Portugal going to war? Not so long ago, the answer would have been yes, now it is no.
Cg
It depends, how you define war...
May be your definition is different from those living in Syria, Palestine or Kashmir.
And what about oppressive economic war being waged upon the people ever since the creation of US Federal Reserves. All of us, the crypto believers, are fighting this war.
@xabi,
It is not often one finds reference to Zoroastrian thought in modern political or philosophical discourse. So, thank you for the reference. While I'm familiar with the broad strokes of the Zoroastrian religion, I must plead ignorance of the details.
I am not one to ever encourage war. I've seen it, and would not wish it upon anyone or any place. With respect to your aforementioned comment, you're right ... there are many different kinds of war, figuratively speaking. Perhaps the word, coercion, better captures the intent of this discussion.
My rhetorical focus is not so much upon tank battalions (literally, war), but rather upon the preceding condition of social disharmony to the extent that nations become, essentially, dysfunctional (which, unfortunately, tends to result in tank battalions).
One of the challenges of the 21st Century will not be whether we can change each other's minds (difficult), but rather whether we can live with each other's differences (more difficult).
There's no assurance that we can.
But here's an interesting insight. Cryptogee created this challenge and very specifically instructed people to not only be honest ... but to be honorable. I have long believed that honor is the key to social harmony. He does not require that you agree with him, or me, about anything, but only that you engage in whatever the debate, honorably.
No making up your own facts so as to support your biases (which we all have). No engaging in ad hominem attacks, imputing moral turpitude upon others simply because they disagree with your political or philosophical opinions. Nobody calling others, "Nazis," unless they're actually sporting Swastikas.
If you look at the exchange or articles, comments and replies between Cryptogee and I, that resulted in this challenge, you will see that he and I disagree about some things relating to Artificial Intelligence and it's implications for humanity.
Nevertheless, it ought to be clear, that he and I grant each other enormous mutual respect. There is precisely nothing about our disagreement that would prevent us from being best friends. Quite to the contrary, steel sharpens steel ... it is precisely because neither of us can dominate the other ... that we are influencing each other.
Let that sink in.
I have to agree with you...
Mutual respect for one another is the key...Every body can have his own opinion and should be respected...
That's how civilized world works and there is nothing noble and civilized about war...