Sunday, September 19, 2010

votes, voice or violence

A vision of a peaceful future is very much needed when ending any conflict. For many the conflicts are of a state building, freedom, reformation or in an opposite view state destruction process. This posting will discuss my thoughts on the peace process of state conflict.

No government rules without the will of the people. This statement is in my belief very true. Each time that someone raises doubt concerning the truth of that statement will stand on the point of how to organize. Simply put if the people do not organize for change then they agree to be ruled. In part this argument is held within the many philosophies of a social contract.

Not to long ago the world had a great idea about bringing states through conflict. That idea was the Trustee Council of the United Nations. Through this office the United Nations would oversee the governmental aspects of a state while the people worked out the philosophies during discussions. The examples are Cambodia, (Democratic Republic of Congo, as we know it today) and East Timor. The foundation of this experiment is the Marshall Plan that was implemented in Germany after World War II. Why it failed is precisely because Britain, France, Russia and The United States collectively sought their own agendas before others. In a word they were to selfish to recognize their own pitiful actions. As for the rest of the world we just agreed that nothing could be done so we followed along letting the stupidity to reign on.

Of course the standard question is what could we have done, these are the super powers? This is the exact thought that goes through the minds of every individual that currently lives with violent, absurd and/or insane leaders. In the political realist realm power is everything and in this case that is what is seems to be. I say seems because power rest with the people. The only difficulty (and it is almost impossible to surmount) is to organize and stop working for these supposed leaders. I know this is a utopian thought but it must be held for peace to come about. So the answer is, when the people become tired of the idiocy they will change. For example we have the peaceful transformation of the Czech Republic separating from both Russia and Slovakia.

There is one example that takes place quite often that is over shadowed by many as being not important. That example is voting in elections. We seem to have the one off episodes of protesting and attention grabbing events to point to but even those are being turned into opportunities for idiocy and violence.

Elections are the culmination of peaceful leadership. However when states are bridging the gap of war and peace, elections are often put into a tenuous credibility view. It must be known that very few states have experienced free and fair elections during the early stages of birth. Some states have experienced challenges to election fraud even after hundreds of years of holding elections.

Whether the conflict is held with votes, voice or violence the issues are the same. People of the state require to be lead by someone that is true to the goals of a social contract and understands that the people hold the ultimate say. With that knowledge it is the duty of the leaders to work towards the highest rung of peaceful actions. This bullshit of self interest only works when there is one person in the room. At last look the world has more than one state.