« Advice Network Looks Promising | Home | My Take On Feminism »
My Take On World Peace
By James | October 27, 2007
World Peace? Ya ya, we’ve heard it all before. Well here’s my take on it- just read it.
Maybe someone can explain this to me. When an individual is asked about a political view or some opinion on ethics, most educated people seems to be somewhat rational about it. Whether we agree with them or not, it is apparent that they have thought over the topic and have formed a strong opinion or solution to the matter; for example, most of us have pretty strong opinions about abortion, civil rights, racism, religion, and conspiracies. On the other hand, collectively, our reasons for major decisions are childish and ignorant. I shall explain what I mean in this jumbled spaghetti format.
Everyone wants world peace. It’s human nature to oppose anything that threatens our survival. There can be world peace when there are no external threats to our survival. Weapons and violence threaten our survival. Bad economic decisions threaten our survival. Racism threatens our survival. Just about anything we don’t agree with, in some way, appears to threaten our survival and we could live without it. For me these are things like violence, racism, money, Britney Spears etc…
When an individual is asked about their personal belief, their reasoning will likely fall under an opposition to their survival, even if two beliefs contradict. Take homosexuality for example. Some religious people will say that the world needs to be cleaned of homosexuals because it goes against the bible. It threatens their survival because these sins will eventually “piss God off” and everyone will suffer in an apocalypse. On the other hand, the rest of society, especially gays, feel that the religious acts are also a threat to their survival; in other worlds, they certainly don’t want to be killed because of their sexual preferences. Two opposing beliefs, both on the basis that it threatens one’s survival.
Remember back when I explained that our collective decisions are often childish and ignorant? A good example of this was when an angry mob attacked the Westboro Baptist Church. For those who don’t know, the Westboro Baptist Church is a small cult in Kansas that are most known for their picket protests and inane “God Hates Fags” contraptions. The angry protesters that attacked them want world peace. They feel they must remove any threats to their survival (WBC & religious extremism are the threats in this case), so they attack the church (similar to how we attack Iraq because they “pose a threat”). If they can take out the church, that’s one less opposition to their survival.
Why was this move stupid? Because they used violence, which is a form of threat that will not further world peace. The attack has made things less peaceful and of course has made no impact on the activity of the church. The church is back in full swing and has even more attention than before. Violence has solved nothing in this case so far.
So what’s my point? My point is that humanity is taking a completely wrong direction in how world peace is being obtained. You’re probably saying, “no shit, tell me something I don’t know”. Well that’s the problem exactly. We know the real way to obtain world peace individually. We know that we can have peace without using violence. We know some methods that we could use to further a peaceful humanity. But why do we still use violence then? Why do we collectively try to destroy anything that opposes us? I think greed might have something to do with it. Subconsciously, our idea of world peace might include having lots of wealth and material possession without anyone trying to take it away. Or perhaps an opportunity to exploit society for personal gain, knowing there will be no opposing force. That’s just one small idea I have though.
One might say that it’s helpless to strive for world peace as one person has little impact. I believe half of that to be complete bullshit. Many single persons have made a huge impact on society. If everyone tried to do the same, things would change very quickly. You must work alone however, as collective change is usually for the worst, as explained. Now, the part that I do agree with is that there will likely never be world peace as long as religion is present.
Religion is the only obstacle that I can find to prevent this world peace agenda from going under way. Westboro Baptist Church and other religious extremism is a good example. I am not taking sides here, I am just pointing out that this conflict of beliefs is the source of the problem. You cannot have world peace with opposing religious beliefs, especially when dealing with killing others.
Either religion has to go or one religion that everyone can support has to be formed. I don’t mean that you can create your own religion and try to convert everyone else, that’s what is happening today and look what’s going on. I am talking about a religion that can rationally please everyone. That is the first and most important step for world peace. Is that still unlikely? Only if YOU and I don’t get out there and try to make a difference. Speak out, share your real opinions, get yourself heard. Don’t try to play this social conformity game, get your true opinions out there to be analyzed. If the Westboro cult can speak out in a less threatening way, they would be a good example of what I mean.
Thanks for reading.
Topics: Religion, Politics, Sociology, Philosophy |
October 27th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
Nice article, and I fully agree. Only by taking individual responsibility for our own actions can we hope to further rational behaviour.
October 31st, 2007 at 10:44 am
Good article. I don’t think religion can take the sole blame as the obstacle to world peace. I think a bigger contributor to the wars today is the profitability of war. If it wasn’t profitable, we (the United States) wouldn’t be doing it. I don’t think Bush’s reasons for starting all these conflicts is religious. I think his handlers are profiting from war and therefore want it to continue.
Just my thoughts.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Control is what everyone wants. Power is what gives you control. That is why we will never have peace.
November 6th, 2007 at 4:30 am
[…] presents My Take On World Peace, posted at Small-town […]
November 8th, 2007 at 9:58 pm
There’s a few blanket statements being made here. And while I can understand that a generalisation implies room for variation, I think that people forget that when it comes to emotional topics like these, and so when someone makes a generalisation like “control is what everyone wants,” people are going to believe that means absolutely everyone. And not consider just what is being controlled.
I don’t want control over anything but my own life. Someone else can lead as long as that leadership doesn’t prevent me from doing what I enjoy, unless what I enjoy is going to hurt someone else.
Also, survival is not the main contributor to my beliefs. Pleasure probably contributes a lot more. I believe that shared knowledge and understanding is a key requirement for getting along with one another, not because it stops us from killing each other, but because it fosters positive emotions.
But I do agree that as long as we have religions with differing opinions on who deserves what, we’ll have discord. Also, I don’t believe there is any religion that could rationally please everyone, simply because many people consider the concept of religion to be irrational. I highly doubt I could consider a supernatural God (of any description) to be rational. None the less, as long as people don’t say their God permits them to interfere with other people’s lives, I’m ok with them believing in whatever they want.
And why do we still use violence? Because we don’t all agree that violence is not the answer (I do, but others don’t).
You’ve mentioned greed, survival, and religion. I think that shows why we don’t have world peace. There are many factors to consider when it comes to interpersonal relations, let alone global ones. And we need to address each and every factor, otherwise at least one of them will cause problems.
November 9th, 2007 at 12:14 am
Thanks Mark.
I just wanted to point out that when I say “religion” in any of my posts, I am usually referring to a belief system. As you probably know, there can be religion without the belief in a supernatural power. Take pantheism for instance.
Since you mention knowledge and understanding, I think that’s probably more important. You can’t really have a universal rational religion without first educating people about what IS rational.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:40 pm
I think you are on the right track. People have to learn to act rationally. Unfortunately we are not taught this. Some of us pick it up from a friend or books, but it is not a part of our education. We are much more likely to be taught blind adherence to a code, be it religious or commercial.
Plato’s Republic is a beautiful example of how reason alone can yield morality, and why morality and reason lead to a happy life.
March 9th, 2008 at 12:38 am
I think religion has actually contributed to discord throughout history. Mainly it’s when a zealot gets a bad idea about the purity of others in their head. I don’t know.
I feel as though religions have been used to control people through our flocking instinct:
Our ideas are generally based off the ideas of those that we consider intelligent or strong. We follow those people, and if they become zealous and decide we should attack someone, we support it.
I think that instead of having one religion to guide, encouraging people to become more independent may be more the answer.
‘course, one way or another we’re attempting to push our ideas onto others, even if it’s our desire for them to think on their own, we can’t know how well it will work. Even with our progeny, we rub off on them.
We just want people to come to a rational conclusion on their own.
It’s hard to do that without all the facts sometimes. And I never feel like all the facts are given.
There are too many things that I see wrong with people in general, but I could be more a part of the problem than my thoughts contributing to the solution. I dunno. I’m very scatterbrained right now.