Dear fellow humans,
I have a question for you. Actually, I have several questions. It has come to my attention that there is a fairly steady stream of fighting that has gone on among us throughout the vast majority of our recorded history. My first question is thus: Why? Are we not all working toward a common goal? Is it not the hope of each and every one of us that we might one day live a happier and healthier life? If we are all working for the same thing, why is it that the means by which we achieve this future matter so much? Should it matter less that we might actually get there one day?
Too many people spend too much time telling other people why they are wrong. Shouldn't we spend that time and energy trying to figure out of they are right? It seems to me that it is possible to every body to be both right and wrong to some extent, and my right and wrong is no better than your right and wrong and vice versa. Why is it that so many people can not be bothered to ponder other possibilities? Why is it so impossible to live and let live, to just once accept that we might not know everything about life?
I beg of you start being more considerate of you fellow man. Start accepting people for the ways that they are different, rather than the ways they are the same. Recognize the beauty of diversity, and stop killing people because you can not agree. It solves nothing! Too many people have died because of our unwillingness to try to understand a different perspective.
I hope to see you in a better future.
Dear fellow humans
By lennon12 - Posted on November 15th, 2008
if only we remove the idea that int'l conflct is a part of int'l relation will what you are saying be possible. the world we are in is srt of to use war to conquer war violent to quence violence and leaving little or nothing for mutual undestanding.
if only we can apply patience in relating with one another on global and individual level, maybe we can move closer to ur opinion.
don't be so pessimistic !!! we are working towards a better future. i wouldn't compare the past to the status quo. i think we should take a step back and look at mirco situations rather than looking at large scale social issues. there is progress within these mirco situations i.e. biotechnology is feeding once poverty strickened areas, people are advancing their research and discoveries on pathogens and genetics.
and most importantly we are healthier and statistically live longer; thus we have more time to think about what we are doing.
Pride.
Peace, coexistence, and compromise is a two way street. It is impossible even if only one side refuses to lay down their weapons. For example, we can try to negotiate our differences with al-Qaeda, but in the meantime they'll keep attacking us. Compromise is impossible in that situation.
I do believe that we are heading to a less conflict-ridden future, as war loses its former appearances of glory and honor. Many people no longer see it as a legitimate means of dealing with others. Hopefully that trend continues.
now offer courses in "Peace Studies." The Green Party was pushing for the creation of a "department of peace" during the 2008 election (the idea is originally Kucinich's)
perhaps these changes are small... but a series of small changes is all it takes to change the world.
"How can we win where fools can be kings" Muse
Very interesting about the a creation of a :" department of peace" Will Obama implement this?
i think i am going to have to research this.
I heard Cynthia McKinney speaking about this on NPR.
here's a website campaigning to have the department started:
http://www.thepeacealliance.org/
the only thing I really found talking about Obama and a possible Department of Peace was on rightwing blogs.
"How can we win where fools can be kings" Muse
"Department of Peace" definitely sounds better than "Department of War," but what would such a department do? I'm always suspicious of our government; who says a Department of Peace won't just turn into an empty name, the same way "Department of Defense" (which is active in attacking other countries, not defending America) did?
I believe that Orwell wrote about a far different "Department of Peace"
it's true that a department is only as good as whoever is in charge of the government. But I like the idea of a governmental department whose sole job is to avoid conflict.
"How can we win where fools can be kings" Muse