in the recent news, there has been a lot of reporting on international conflict (and even intra-national conflict, depending on whose side of boundary definitions you're on). to name a few, the palestinians and israelis are at it again, this time where the americans are backing an israeli annexation of palestinian land (normally i would stay away from such a term, but even the israelis are blatantly using 'annex' in their statements, so we'll not beat around the bush). the chinese are in a border dispute with india. the chinese have internal conflicts with the hong kongers, thanks to the ongoing dispute on authority as to who should govern hong kong. the chinese also have long-standing disputes of autonomy and authority to govern various regions, namely taiwan, tibet, western china, mongolia, and manchuria. china also has ongoing issues with several south-east asian countries thanks to its 'belt and road' initiative. basically, china has issues with pretty much any and every country it can come into contact with. heck, it even has issues with defining its borders in the ocean (a brief list includes contentious water boundaries [which includes several small, unnamed islands] with the philippines, malaysia, korea, japan...). ukraine and russia still cannot resolve their dispute over the crimea peninsula. i could probably go on for a bit on the countries and contentious areas, but i think the point is made.
i've always said that this blog is more for creative writing, and shouldn't go into politics, religion, or the like, but as i grow older, it has occurred to me that the various countries that we hold so high in regard don't actually live up to the expectation, as exemplified by these issues. i would have imagined such expansionistic ideologies would not have survived the 1800s, and their after-effects dealt with in due time, but not only has this proven to be untrue, but the conflicts are, if anything, exacerbated.
to this, i blame... everyone really. we, as a (single) human race, have evolved beyond such petty need for tribalism (of which, nationalism is probably the latest and most notorious flavour of the month), and yet, here it remains - here it still rears its unwanted, selfish face. the irony, i feel, is that when i discuss these issues with any individual, the problem seems apparent. suggested solutions come hard and fast, and compromises are readily made. however, when the issues are brought up in groups, no end is in sight. i'm sure psychologists and sociologists have discussed, in length, why and how this happens. my point, however, is a criticism on that it does happen to begin with.
a common narrative on these issues is that none of these 'us against them' arguments are inherently held (dearly) by individuals, and that incitement to support such causes is perpetuated to serve the means and agendas of 'the elite'. to be honest, i feel that these are very vague, and may lend a generalist argument to specific ones, but i am not privy enough to the details to elaborate upon them here. i will acknowledge the compellingness of the argument, but i don't think i can lend much backing to the semantics of it (which usually devolve into conspiracy theories, which i do find amusing!).
in any case, what i do believe to be rightfully criticised, is that our governments have yet to look past such contentions. are the conflicts rooted deeply in history, and culture, and belief, perhaps religion, and dogmatic indoctrination? yes. are we incapable of solving such issues? i don't believe that we aren't. it continues to boggle my mind that not only have people-elected representatives not been able to hammer out and enact on compromise, but these same people continually bring up even more points of contention and fan the flames of tribal-rivalry!
it may be a bit much to expect people (especially those who stand to gain) to compromise ideologies and find common ground, but surely there can be an agreeable 'this is for the better of the many' outcome that doesn't involve (more) warring, or conflict, or suffering (which hasn't begun to address the converse, where we should be talking about better management of resource).
it's hard to not think that the governance is really just a glorified group of playground bullies, puffing out their chests and measuring penis sizes. except people are actually dying when there's a scuff. because the bullies themselves aren't actually the ones fighting.
i've often joked that we need a 'greater threat' to humanity for us to actually band together, and to this, i cannot wait for the alien invasion to come. or the singularity. maybe the zombie plague? either / or works, i guess!
