gaara-131 [2006-11-12 16:58:49 +0000 UTC]
How different are humans from other species? In each case, it's the strongest that get what they need, or even want. Other animals fight their own wars, not so different from humans.
People do fear what they don't understand, but peace is understood. It has been known by someone at one time at least. It is a basic idea of goodness that people can innately undertand, and thus their is an existing strive for it.
How can we tire of peace if we've never known it ? You bring up both points in your thesis.
I have just presented an argument. THis could be called a differnce in opinions, or perhaps juxtoposed personalities. This exists all over the world, and therefore, there is a need for countires. Human similarities as a whole go only as far as natural rights and basic appearance. It could be said that countires are formed by people of similar beliefs and personalities. How they are run and the emergence of leaders is another matter entirely.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Patches363 In reply to gaara-131 [2006-12-03 07:41:54 +0000 UTC]
Men agree, and so too do they contradict. To say that humans as a species have one uniform ideal, one opinion, would be an ardent misinterpretation of history. To that end countries provide for these differences. That point I agree on. However,
countries as institutions inevitibly spawn conflict and resentment. We see in our day the negative implications of nations and boarders, the misunderstanding and hatred formed by the few, and infused into the many. In the end, its an argument over the goods and bads presented by boarders. Does the order provided justify the confilct that is inevitibly spawned? In the state of nature would man tear himself apart, or would he find a way to coexist with his neighbor? Yes we disagree, but does that mean that we can't coexist without governments and boarders, without lines and property. In the end, the world would live far better if these imaginary lines invented and employed by humans were erased and forgotten. They do not exist in the state of nature, so then why should we impliment them on the world and force upon it the strife that inevitably follows.
Peace, something all wish for, yet which illudes forever more. We say that peace is ideal, that should the world live in harmony we'd all be better off. Misinterpreted and distorted, peace as it once was no longer exists. Governments, lifestyles rely on war and conflict. Mistles, guns, even our venture to the stars lead back to death, killing, destruction. So peace as we know it remains a product of war, and so shall remain forever tainted by the blood of many. Until we can shead that which we forever return to, humans will never truly comprehend the fruits of peace. Living at home in isolation from the world do we experience peace? We merely separate ourselves from the world, and so can't see the pain, suffering and strife that forever engulfs it.
Perhaps not our own fault, we imagine a peace which we have no reason to doubt, and so concieve as real, but which is an illusion abroad. And this false peace, the foggy peace that blurrs our view and hides true harmony, is a product of modern society and its governments and countries.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0