The following is an excerpt I liked from JFK's inaugural address. Basically, he was implying that if everybody owns a big gun, the world would be a safer place (this logic didn't help him personally). I see merit in this argument, especially in global sense - the best way to stop a war is by creating conditions that deter it. Thieves don't try to break into the White House every day, for a good reason! Gandhi was imprisoned in his own land because India was (and still is, for its size) defenseless and divided.
Even in local sense, guns will even out (to a large extent) the unfair advantage physically stronger people have over the weaker folks. I used to think differently on this issue about ten years ago. May be I have been eating Texas' soil for a little too long!
Even in local sense, guns will even out (to a large extent) the unfair advantage physically stronger people have over the weaker folks. I used to think differently on this issue about ten years ago. May be I have been eating Texas' soil for a little too long!
Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.
We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.
2 comments:
Thanks for this interesting view, Gopa.
The US folks think differently. After all, only the strongest immigrants survived the rigors of colonizing America.
But i really wonder whether that's a long-lasting philosophy. The only way to peace is more peace, not through deterrence.
Anyway, we will know soon enough.
Raama,
You are right. I am not entirely comfortable with my thought process. But I just can't see a way out, practically speaking, in the near future (next 50 years or so).
Dropping our firearm after commencement of countdown for a duel has begun, I think is risky.
Disarmament has to be a gradual process (and is necessary, as you rightly said), and it is tricky in this huge globe with diverse cultures and values.
This world can't effort to sit and watch when belligerent nations with huge piles of nuclear arsenal start policing the world. We need at least some bipolarity to motivate the aggressors to be peaceful.
We need our inborn instinct of self-defense for survival (like rest of the animals). We humans managed to gain and sustain the top-predator status. Now, we need to be prepared defend ourselves from aggressive humans; at least until we manage to subside their aggressiveness, by offering them the love that they were denied of. It is a tricky situation w/no good short-term solution, I think.
Post a Comment