I’ve noticed that, save for an irrelevant minority, people tend to stick to either one of the following groups: 1) those who are against Israel invading Lebanon AND in favor of Russia invading Ukraine or else 2) those who are in favor of Israel invading Lebanon AND against Russia invading Ukraine. The bullshitting-pseudo-noble-reason they might claim they took those contradicting sides for doesn’t matter much, like any other bullshitting-pseudo-noble-reason for that matter. It’ll be something about imperialism, capitalism, communism, totalitarianism, nationalism, fascism, racism, terrorism, zionism, islamism or any other “-ism”. What’s sure is that they are taking sides against one invasion AND in favor of the other one. Either one.
I don’t have anything against people taking contradicting sides. Well, maybe I do have something against it, but who am I to judge after all? History might even prove some of them right. Actually, come to think of it, history will most likely prove some of them right, as history is notoriously written by the winners. Those who will surely lose, whatever happens, are the ones who are against invasions, period; those who are in favor of national sovereignty, no matter what.
So I won’t judge, whatever the side the loud majority chooses is. I just beg them not to bullshit me with talks of peace, human rights, defense of the weaker, national sovereignty, international laws, etc. They are not against wars, invasions or genocides at all. They just choose which war, invasion or genocide they prefer. And then they find some bullshitting-pseudo-noble-reason for their ambiguous, contradicting, schizophrenic and paradoxical stand.
Even the most belligerent ones, those who are in favor of all wars and invasions, despite exhibiting some ethical issues, have a more consistent attitude.
No comments:
Post a Comment