I am all for progress, but if others lag behind you can't just trust that they will bow to your superior ethics. More likely they will see your ethics as a weakness. There isn't really less war now, anyway, it is just more often waged economically. Later, maybe we'll find more and more benign ways to wage it until it no longer resembles its progenitor. Nice thought.
Africa is a golden example of what happens when part of the world evolves past a primitive practice (colonialism) and simply leaves. The same could be said for Southeast Asia. As crea says, in order for 'Peace and Coexistence' to prevail there, it would have to be imposed. We are too evolved for that, so our ex-colonies are... better for it?
Nah. Peace and Coexistence, once again, are the products of care, not carelessness. The UN wants to rebuild Iraq after we are done, will we get blamed when they wander off, like they have everywhere else? Damned if ya do, damned if ya let someone else do... We are taken to task for ongoing troubles in Afghanistan, and yet a stronger hand would be the dreaded 'nation building'.
**
I got into an argument with a vegetarian once. I can comprehend the need to avoid meat for health reasons (though I doubt the soundness of the practice). This person, though, was totally against meat as a food source because it required killing an animal. I wondered out loud whether lions would be better off if they did so too, and the vegetarian wholeheartedly agreed with the idea. Not only was it morally wrong for us to eat animals, it was morally wrong for the lion too. The lion just wasn't 'evolved' enough to notice. That concept is so foreign to me that it is really beyond comprehension.
Where do ideals like this come from? At what point are we bettered by finding the normal working order of nature distasteful? Maybe natural processes evolve to unrecognizable equivalents, but I am troubled by any need to cast them off completely before their time, whether it be war or my rare steak...
WinCustomize Forums
