The Violent Answer

Yesterday the Democratic party took control of

Congress. After much patronizing and self-

delusion, Rummy had to step down.

Bush's impopular Iraq war and the recent

Republican corruption scandals antagonized

enough voters for the Democrats to "whoop" the

asses of their opposition.

I had about lost hope in US voters. I was

almost starting to feel like Mark Twain, who

stayed in the country only as to avoid its

foreign policies.

It's no secret the US often acts like a spolied

brat bullying in the complicated, delicate tapestry of the world

stage. But if  you want to lead, shouldn't your

demands be encouraged by example? Shouldn't all

our actions be coherent with our expectations?

But most of the weapons of mass destruction in

Iraq right now are the bombs being dropped by US

war planes. You can't pretend to battle some

local tyranny by inflicting your rule from outside.

You can't enforce "freedom", a contradiction in

terms, or impose your beliefs on others. Sadly,

people can be antagonized and terrorized,

oppressed and enslaved. But that won't

necessarily affect what they believe in. If your

beliefs are reasonable all they'll need to

flourish is free expression, they themselves can

be the strength of your argument. And if you're

feeling particularly righteous in your stand why

not sway more people with the example and purity

of your own behavīor?

This is my opinion on any belief. I think it was

Bertrand Russell who said that the least

reasonable your argument, the louder you are

forced to shout. When we use violence to drag

some message down people's throats we're

revealing the weakness of our own arguments.

Russell did say that "The stupid are cocksure,

and the intelligent full of doubt". My

interpretation of these words is not as negative

as his,( he started that thought with "What's

wrong with the world is...") as I think doubt is

an imporant antidote to close-mindedness. Your

thoughts and beliefs could earn their stay in

your mind by facing your constant probbing and

reflection. Faced with this adversity, ideas

will evolve and our most vaulable and essential

traits will remain.

My belief is that violence begets violence and

resentment. It's a cycle that's very difficult

to break, a conflict that often isn't overcome,

it merely lies dormant in the hearts and minds

of the survivors and their future generations.

Being born into this cycle makes it even harder

to stop or "turn the other cheek". But it's a

worthwhile aspiration to try to become the best

we can.

Even if we believe in an after life, or in

another world, whatever our religion or

convictions are, isn't this earth and its beings

part of that creation? ... Wouldn't we more

likely gain access to that future, peaceful

bliss some call heaven if our actions on the

ground truly reflected those same ideals?

Of course the world would benefit from equality.

I think no matter your nationality the basic

needs of all people could and should be met.

And some think that violence is required for a

successful revolution, that it is necessary to

change the unjust conditions and corruption

which may run rampant under certain regime,

national or international. But sometimes those

that aquire power through violence hold on to it

through violence, even inflicting it upon the

people they initially, supposedly, fought for.

More than the other way around, our means

justify, and reflect, our ends. Our actions

reveal our objectives. Our methods reveal our

nature.

The idea of our own welfare depending on the

physical or ideological oppression of others,

will always fuel conflict and instability.

Underneath it all, what we all need and desire

is not that different. Our long-term survival,

our safety, our equality, are all more likely to

be achieved through tolerance, dialogue and

cooperation than through violence and

brutality.