World peace is a farce. When religious folks talk about it, they mean if you follow their rules. If the environmentalists and communists (which are really just their own kinds of religion) cry for it, they mean if you do things their way. When the governments claim to be working toward it, it’s a matter of following their dictums or suffer greatly.
How anyone could know the best set of rules for everyone in every circumstance is a mystery to me. Most people don’t even fully understand the impact of their decisions and actions on those they live with. It’s just hard to get in someone else’s bubble and know their world completely. We are all finite in our own perspective and some of us are selfish, but getting along starts with individuals and takes individual effort.
Most people would consider it ludicrous to have an unknown expert or well-meaning friend come into their homes and tell them how to run their relationships. For one thing, it wouldn’t be their relationship anymore. It would be between the so-called expert and the family member or friend. Then, after that attempt at help was gone, the original players are really left to work it out as their relationship.
And what if you and the “relationship expert” disagree on some point? On tactics or meaning? Who gets to decide and enforce their view of how things need to be conducted. Here is where the true concept of ownership becomes obvious. No one can really own another person’s relationships. He or she can make those relationships difficult in any number of ways, but in spite of the interconnectedness of society, each relationship is unique.
Throw into the mix the unverifiable numbers of those who just aren’t interested in trying to get along at all. There goes any substantial chance for peace in your local town, let alone the world. Everyone knows someone in their circle of influence who is like that. Usually more than one. Do the math. Chances for world wide peace are somewhere between zero and hilariously impossible.
It is not just a few people. Selfishness is common. Arrogance is not hard to find. Many ideas about how we “all” should live are more based on these two phenomena. One person or group thinks the money should be spent this way. Others disagree. Information is suggested (and statistically verified; I’ll try to be impressed) about this causes that, and whose selfish actions lead to whatever.
It is all known to “be true without a doubt.” Until next year, or the year after that. Humanity as a whole is easily swayed by this cause or that, trying to validate facts that can’t be validated. Trying to assign motives, when they aren’t even honest about their own. We understand so little about the universe, though it is tempting to act otherwise.
Does sunshine cause cancer or does sunscreen cause cancer? Do airplanes invite disaster or do they help advance prosperity? Did most people believe the world was flat or was that just a few people exploring that theory? Is washing regularly good for overall health or does it predispose children to allergies? Can anyone today know that it will take disposable diapers 450 years to decompose? Can people affect the environment as much as they think, or are they more at it’s mercy?
Ironicaly, it is often about the changes we expect others to make. “Other” people should use this less or do this more. “Other” people are greedy and selfish if they don’t do things a certain way.
Of course, there are certain core ideas that don’t change. And they don’t change, no matter how much we yell at each other about them. Sometimes individuals change their minds, but it is usually because of thoughtful, personal conversation and reflection. Not because they were forced to. However, the opposing ideas live on in segments of the populations and cause strife because they are incompatible.
And what is this thing called “compromise?” How is it that the working out of “compromise” is another way of saying more rules to control. Why is it rarely about deleting laws and regulations? How does controlling others equal “peace?” It’s not peace; it is defeat of some ideas in favor of others. Which means, it is the defeat of some people to be ruled by others.
How many people do you really trust? Be honest. It’s not just about being polite or acting nice in public. Who can you count on to keep your own best interest in mind? Who will empty your pockets, exhaust you, and/or use all your time if you were just “more available?” Why do you lock your doors and keep your bank accounts private? Who will really sacrifice themselves for you?
Many of the ideas of what would create a perfect world clash with each other. What many people
think say means “peace” really means “do it my way or I will use whatever methods are at my disposal to force you.” They pose like it is about sharing and caring, but it is truly about taking and manipulating. Based on their understanding of the world. Which couldn’t possibly be wrong. Until next year.
There will be conflict until the world as we know it ends. There is a constant battle of world views that just don’t mesh and there is no possible compromise. The only chance we each have for peace is to have it in ourselves. I hope you have a true source for that.