Refugees May Re-Create Crisis.

Discussion of these issues saturates the media, from Al-Jazeera to ABC or to the other ABC. To some extent this enables the youth to witness what not to do. To some extent it informs those in positions of power. To the rest of us, it gives our imaginations room to roam, to dream ourselves healing benefactors, benevolent dictators, heroic soldiers, suave spies and many more roles. One person may have their depressive attitudes justified, another their hope and a third their nihilism.

The world has problems. Hopefully we can agree on that. Among them are problems creating refugees, and the problems of those refugees. This is about that second set.

The Syrian civil war, where stable government has been lost and there is terrible suffering, was partially caused by refugees. These had fled from suffering in a myriad of neighbouring nations. They caused a burden on the secular government of Assad, which along with a number of other factors, led to the current state of affairs. To some extent, alongside violent, apocalyptic religion, CIA paranoia-inducing actions are also responsible.

The refugees now fleeing Syria, are a contributing factor in future re-creations of the same state of affairs elsewhere. This awareness is overblown in certain communities. Appropriate responses are unknown and will only be clear in hindsight. Discussion of economic deals to give a decent job to refugees in Jordan, are a part of the solution. So to are efforts by MSF to supply a level of medicine. A paltry effort has been made by EWB, though no public notice from them on plumbing or bridges. Some talk as though refugees should be distributed throughout the world by GDP, others by capita and more still hold ignorance as their bliss. Have good faith, things gets better.


Towards Utopia.

Utopia, heaven on earth. Who has the keys to this kingdom, where are they to be found?

First, I believe that some facets of modern life are ideal. A key to utopia is to deliberate upon which facets of modern life are ideal and able to be consistent with other changes planned. A necessary risk of change is that unforeseen consequences may occur, so the intelligent mind will consider contemporary ideal facets of modern life and how much they may change in the efforts towards utopia. Modern plumbing, as found in England, is near to ideal. Well, perhaps plumbing shall need to be overhauled for a future revolution, maybe to install an underground tunnel system for near instant travel.

Second, utopia maybe realised by removal of negatives. The above example of plumbing, specifically sharing this public service globally, exemplifies this. Currently some of the world lacks acceptable plumbing, there are regions without running water and more without efficient sewage networks. Recognising problems with known solutions, then applying the known solutions is a method of moving from the present towards the perfect.

Third, if we can imagine and realistically describe a utopia, it should be possible to move backwards from the dream. Again let us use the above example to continue the discussion off of, an underground tunnel teleportation system. Holding this dream in mind when developing a city, in the minds of the citizens voting, specialists designing and economists bartering, holding this ideal in mind shows us how to move towards a utopian aspect which does not exist at all.

Utopia can be more fully realised by maintaining whichever contemporary standards are perfect, by resolving solvable problems and by working backwards from the dream.

Over-Coming Anti-War.

The Opinion:
War in Syria, as lead by the USA, will leave behind nothing better than has been left in Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan.


The Counter-Argument:

The purpose of action is good results, but also to exemplify right & wrong intentions. Foreign intervention must clearly include Russian, Iranian, Saudi Arabian actions and also non-violent actions. Actions speak louder than words, to act & speak in & about Syria is partially an exercise in morality. Refusal to speak about the correct way to intervene and denial of a correct way to intervene, or to even opine intervention, refuses and denies one’s own capacity for morality and refuses & denies one’s nations capacity for morality.

On the international stage, there are many moral standards. Human Rights is the most agreed upon standard, but could be held as among the least enforced of moral standards. Agreements justified by a basis in national law have led to a consensual basis of international law. International law has not been the basis to fully create a national code, although it has been used as a standard to decide corrective challenges re-writing a national code. There has not been an extension of Human Rights in an idealistic & realistic method to create a state structure which has the consensus of Human Right principles. If Human Rights are to develop a better tomorrow, they must be implemented. If Human Rights are to have value, that value must be defended.

Actions taken in the three nations (Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan) were, definitively partially, against endemic forms of state violence. Prior to engagement of foreign military, there are demonstrable offences against Human Rights, as well as demonstrable attempts to improve the situation by political and economic approaches. The actions of the three nations, and the reactions against them, were not consistent with the principles of Human Rights. The actions of those three nation state-systems are the greater of the two evils, in my opinion.

Now there is a clearer standard for foreign intervention in a positive example of the trumpet calls for war, a negative example in the trumpet calls against war and in a realistic example of what actually happened. It would be a quiet planet if none of those trumpets sounded again. However, the scarcity of public goods & services in Syria, alongside the wrongful exercise of state violence in Syria has struck against the bell of Human Rights, which then sounded both sets of trumpets. Hopefully by heeding the lessons of history, a larger example of what to do and a smaller example of what not to do, shall be the legacy of foreign intervention in Syria.

A Global Order.

Movement to & fro unity is a constant in this world of flux. Perhaps it is all heading for a final unity in the heat death of the universe. Or maybe not. Regardless, I believe there is an inexorable trend towards greater global unity is and that’s a bloody good thing. With modern travel, trade and the internet, it is global exposure at the individual level as never before.

Global moral code has not developed an individually significant hierarchy. UN action & discussion is very distant from individuals. Unity & disunity between moral codes has lessened because of the UN, and conversation between nations has increased. Continuing conflict between moral codes is inevitable, acceptable and a place where the competition will never end.

At the individual level, the effects of the internet must surely be considered the most global of the facets of the immediate environment. This facet is a shared experience of the general chaos that is the internet today. This will lead to a set of consistent experiences which will have a systemic structure, and will develop a global moral code relevant at the individual level. Potential competing codes may arise about divisions of language, technical capacity (IRC, darknet), Google result hierarchy and others.