We would often talk about 'rights', in those days
and our sacred right to do as we pleased.
|Friend and Foe|
But along with rights come responsibilities.
There can be no claim to individual or collective rights
if one abdicates the personal responsibilities that go with them.
When countries would be attacked by external forces,
the elected leaders would respond ruthlessly, and disproportionately,
using violence against the innocent, serving as sacrificial lambs for their 'holy cause'.
These reactive acts of barbarism were used to show the electorate
that they would not accept monstrous aggressions 'lying down'.
whoever paid the price, it was rationalized, was just "not that important".
Was it ever acknowledged, one's responsibility not to antagonize another,
or to limit another's access to the very basics we all took for granted?
However had we come to create our 'Foe' in the first place,
living alongside an enemy who must eternally be defeated?
We must always look toward the other,
and make our best intentioned effort to attend to their needs,
just as we would our own,
This is the very essence of a compassionate society,
and the divine key to avoiding future conflict.
When war escalated between societies, did we not spend more time
accusing our foe of crimes, or more energy asking: "how best we could help"?
Did we not exalt our right to defend ourselves above our sacred obligation,
and personal responsibility, to alleviate the suffering of others not entirely like us?
I can't remember the answers to these questions; the pain happened so very long ago.
Future CT Village 5, Nova Avalon. Year 17 P.T.E.