Published via Ecency

For the past few days, I have been away from negative news i.e. war related absurdity. It has been years now, so I am just tired of reading and worrying all day long for humaniy. But, fate always has tricks to humble us. I was watching "Family Guy" episode, and Peter says, "Anyone who doesn't want to go to war is gay." Well, I am offended, and I am ready to go to war now. Funny enough, gay in its both senses: gender and happy (for old English) is logical. We hate what we call "gay", yet somehow - I say innately - find ourselves perfectly happy when it comes to war. Now, thanks to the algorithm, next up in my feed was a video of woman protecting his man. AlJazeera reported it, and the term they used is Busification.

Busfication is an informal Ukrainian term used to describe the alleged forcible or coercive mobilisation of men into the Ukrainian military.

alt

Previously, there had been news of areas/towns where no men "eligible" to be in military was found. So nothing significant has been achieved by far, and no hope seems visible.

Anyway let the Delusional Moral talks begin

Because apparently humanity has reached, maybe always was, the stage where we need a philosophical jury to determine: isit morally right or wrong to drag a man onto a bus because he does not to go war?

Now imagine this. A 25-year-old Ukranian man. He has parent; perhaps a wife and children. He has never met Zelensky, maybe neither voted for him. He has never been to parliament. He does not personally hate Russian civilians. He is not the one who made participation in war a must thing. He is a patriot; but he does not care about nationalism. And, now, state wants him to go to the war. Just because, he is a citizen. He questions, "why should I?" And it is not cowardice. It is a legitimate moral question. Same is the scenario with a Russian soldier.

Moreover, is he even obliged?

I looked into religious traditions, because two-third of the world follows this notion. And, as usual, religion has promoted peace - until, there is transgression. However, in the face of religion, humans have already done more henious acts than peaceful cooperation.

Oh yes, a strong argument - Russia started it. But, don't you think enough lives have been lost already? How about the great world leaders end this crap up?

How about we start considering each other as human beings?

I am a Ukrainian; you are a Russian. The concept of: "Us" vs "Them" is nothing but self-created hatred. I have to kill that particular race, because I believe my race is supreme i.e. "master race." This is where the morality of war becomes uncomfortable.

We are very comfortable with national talks. Ukraine this, Russia that. NATO this, Europe that. The West and the East. Thanks to the "Treaty of Westphalia," (I am not against it) we have drawn borders on maps. Then attached moral identities to the people living behind those borders. One side is the aggressor; the other is the defender. One soldier is a hero and another a criminal. Anyways both are "martyred" in their specific lense.

However, the person holding the gun is a human being.

We live in a world, where the so-called democratic system provides - equal rights for all. Great isn't it? I have rights. You have rights. The only one left is "them." We have consitutions, courts, international organisations and treaties around the idea of individual human rights. Until there is war. Suddenly, the same human being acquires a label: Ukrainian, Russian, Israeli, Palestinian, American, Iranian and list goes on. And unfortunately, the invisible line of border starts to define his value.

I find this contradiction difficult to digest. We say children are innocent. Then we call their deaths "collateral damage." Moreover, we say war is "tragic." Then we create heroic language around the people sent to participate in the "tragic." The ugliest thing is: them does not need to be evil. They only need to be different. And that, dear human being, is enough.

There is another problem: normalization

Like we have also become remarkably good at getting used to death. At first, ten people died, and we termed it "horrific." A hundred die, and it becomes a "tragedy." A thousand die, and it becomes a "stats." Every day, there is a headline, "5 soldiers were killed in drone attacks." And what we do? We scroll ahead. The tragedy does not necessarily become smaller. The problem lies in our reactions. And that is the most disturbing psychological consquences of prolonged war. We have normalised "few deaths" as part of life. Until, we see a bigger figure; we do not take it serious.

The Uncomfortable Conclusion

I am not nnaive enough to believe that every war can be stopped, every man can be protected. And all that just by asking everyone to be nice to each other. There are aggressors. There are victims. There are situations where people have to defend themselves. And the thing is, we all are interconnected in it. If two countries go to war, we all are facing the wrath - economically and mentally. The moment we become too comfortable with wars is the moment we should become worried about ourselves.

I do not know whether humanity will ever become wise enough to stop fighting wars. But I can see one thing, we are not in the right direction.