Selective Unity?

[HARDCORE]

During World War II, the people of our nation, and indeed the entire world, were brought together in a life or death struggle for survival. And whether or not some of the catalyst that lead up to that war, or any other war for that matter, was contrived, is really inconsequential. For after the lead began to fly, at least as concerns the guy standing in the line of fire, survival became the key issue!

It was really not that much difference in most wars. In the American Revolution, the merchants and big business of the day played no small part in fermenting hostilities. While on the British side, ego and possession of empire was paramount!

In the Mexican War, land acquisition was a pressing issue, and in the Civil War, what constituted economic rights and personal property came into play, right or wrong! It is, after all, a given that mankind has always been able to place a noble spin on his marshal efforts, but in the long run, it is always greed and power by one side or the other that leads to the initial confrontation.

Like it or not, Manifest Destiny, the dispossession of the Indian Nations, and even the Spanish American War, began as a result of somebody wanting what the other guy had, or attempting to hang on to what he himself possessed. And this holds true, even if what you have, you originally stole from someone else! But as I said before, once the bombs begin to drop and the bullets begin to fly, the whole issue of who or what started the conflict becomes moot, and pure survival kicks in!

Also, is it not at this point that selective unity comes into play? A unity among nations and among people, whom before that time, were trying to kick each other?s teeth out in the market place? Is this not a unity of convenience and a unity of survival, so to speak?

Now wouldn?t it be nice if this unity existed 24/7, through thick and thin? And if our own people practiced this brand of unity, even among each other, on a daily basis, instead of the dog eat dog mentality that usually saturates the scene! Maybe then we would have a foundation to really build upon!

The ?We Can Agree To Disagree Mentality? that temporarily eases most contradictory situations is in itself an offspring of excuse? An excuse that is employed when a loggerhead is reached between two stubborn entities vying for the same property, be that property financial, spiritual, or even the possession of human rights and flesh! And when enough people on either side of an issue, are adamant or stubborn enough to come to blows, or even a more severe form of hostility, then this thing called selective unity can escalate into man?s basest endeavor - all out war. For war, after all, has never proven who is right, just who is left!

Were not the League of Nations, NATO, SEATO, the United Nations, and even the reunification of the United States after the Civil War, a form of selective unity? Now I ask you, on their own, have any of these partnerships ever stopped a single conflict? So I put it to you that selective unity is at times - no unity at all, but merely a placebo of the human mind.

The human spirit may be willing and eager to embrace a better world, but the mind, soul and greed of a powerful few, has almost always over ruled common sense and sanity!

Remember - "UNITY, LIKE CHARITY, SHOULD & MUST BEGIN AT HOME!!"

VERITAS (Truth)

[BLUEHAWK]

Originally posted by HARDCORE

Were not the League of Nations, NATO, SEATO, the United Nations, and even the reunification of the United States after the Civil War, a form of selective unity? Now I ask you, on their own, have any of these partnerships ever stopped a single conflict? So I put it to you that selective unity is at times - no unity at all, but merely a placebo of the human mind.

The human spirit may be willing and eager to embrace a better world, but the mind, soul and greed of a powerful few, has almost always over ruled common sense and sanity!

Remember - "UNITY, LIKE CHARITY, SHOULD & MUST BEGIN AT HOME!!"

VERITAS (Truth)

Good thoughtful post... not that you need to be praised

1. I don't think they were a form of selective unity so much as they were the hopeful (if not sometimes desparate and misguided?) attempts of ordinary people to put and end to violence and suffering.

2. Unlike many, I would assert that at times, some of those attempts at unity DID, plausibly, stop perhaps more than a "single conflict."

I think I begin to see what you are driving at though. Maybe something about unity being susceptible to contrivance and falsehoods?

No doubt.

I would think, however, that it be incorrect (and hence there the "rub" resides?) to make the statement that "During World War II, the people of our nation, and indeed the entire world, were brought together in a life or death struggle for survival."

Clearly NOT the "entire world" were brought together for any such purpose. In fact, only a relatively few millions were out of the entire national and world population, and even then often either against their will or in almost total isolation from the "mainstream", whether serving on the enemy or the defender side.

In other words, HAD the people of our nation and the entire world been brought together, then probably no war would have been started or necessary.

That ain't gonna happen, ever. So, in that sense, your thesis about "selective unity" is precisely correct. Not only is unity sometimes selective, but it can also be quite selfish.

There do appear to be three possible mitigating options, however (neither of which are as easy as merely declaring "unity").

a. Listen to the "conscience voice"

b. Remain humble

c. Be loyal

In that order.