Tuesday, October 10, 2023

Blessed are the peacemakers

And they are desperately needed now.  The massacre in Israel and Israel's response is the latest in a wave of reminders that, no, we haven't 'gamed war.'  That is, we aren't the first generation of awesomeness that finally put that dumb war stuff behind us unlike all the losers who came before.  Sadly, I fear much of what we are seeing, and may see in the future, will be partly a result of that hubris we allowed ourselves to believe. 

In any event, like all such tragedies in human history, it's the little ones who suffer the most.  The helpless, the innocent.  Those who, if we are to set aside modern templates, have no culpability in what is happening.  For those of us wishing to learn from history, we should be bending our prayers and our hopes to those who can bring peace to this conflict.  Even among the belligerents let there be found a glimmer of peace. 

After all, with each additional conflict we see breaking out now, this quote from a history of the Second World War keeps coming to my mind:

What were the origins of the Second World War?  German dissatisfaction with the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, certainly, and the economic disaster brought on by the depression.  The Japanese desire for growth in the Far East and subsequent American pressure were other factors, as were expansionist policies by Russia and Italy.  But no one could have foreseen that three separate wars caused by these factors - the German-Polish war, the Sino-Japanese war, and the Russo-Finnish war - would mushroom, overlap and turn nearly the entire world into a battlefield. (emphasis mine)

Yep. Regional conflicts in Ukraine and Israel now.  What will it be in four more years?  

13 comments:

  1. Good article, but the "peacemakers" of the Beatitudes refers to people who live peacefully with their own neighbors, not to third-party arbitrators of conflicts. Or, as Wycliffe correctly translated, "Blessed are the peaceable." Jesus was promising to reward his followers for how they lived, not for peace activism or the resolution of other people's conflicts. Good article just the same.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think that element needs to be excluded. Certainly living peacefully is essential, especially for helping bring peace to the world. But throughout the ages this has been called upon to instill a sense of action where helping to bring peace to conflicts or resolving hostilities is concerned.

      Delete
  2. (Tom New Poster)
    My thoughts:
    1. WWII started in Europe because the Germans who started WWI were never held accountable. They bragged about winning on the Eastern Front and how Versailles betrayed them, etc. Had we treat Germany and its leadership in 1919 as we had to treat them in 1945, it would have involved far less blood and treasure, prevented the second war, the Holocaust and the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe for 50 years.
    2. The current chief belligerents are old imperial powers (Russia, China, Iran) who want their empires back. They are collectivist societies with no internal opposition parties. Those nations that have individual rights as the basis of their laws, allow internal opposition etc. have managed peace with themselves and the world since 1945.
    3. Islam is a unique issue: the only major world religion founded in barbarism and perfectly happy in barbarism: a nomadic warrior society living on plundering and controlling others. Christianity and Judaism require a civilized order and bring one with them when they don't find one (hence the accusations of "imperialism" by the descendants of New World barbarians against the missionaries). Islam will be defeated by the sword or the cross: take your pick.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. (Tom New Poster)
      The tragedy of the East European Germans could have been at least obviated by my #1, but it was partly the result of Romantic Era notions of "one people, one language, one country". The Germans in the Alsace and Danish Slesvig accepted minority status with certain guaranteed local rights and are still there. Same is true in Malmedy (Belgium) and the South Tyrol in Italy.

      Delete
    3. Nothing here I can disagree with. My thought is that in 1937, there was no way the world could see what was happening and then envision things in 1944. That's my concern here. We don't know what is going to happen in the near future. It's enough that we're seeing things fall apart in a way that does bring the situation in the late 1930s to mind.

      Delete
    4. Disagree. The salient feature of the evolution of Germany was that the German establishment was discredited by serial failures. The available force not implicated in any of these disasters was the Nazi Party. Note, volkisch parties were, prior to 1930, never particularly consequential in German politics. It required all three hammer blows - malnutrition and the loss of the war, the inflation of 1922-24, and the Depression (1928-32).
      ==
      Iran has had approximately similar borders for centuries. As for China, their abuse of Tibet, Sinkiang, and Mongolia notwithstanding, they've tended to be inward looking and have few ambitions outside a certain sphere. What's anxiety provoking is that they seem to have extralocal ambitions. The Putin camarilla may want to reassemble the old East Bloc. That's had a collision with reality in the last 18 months.

      Delete
    5. Again, it wasn't a point by point comparison. The point is, in the late 30s, nobody could have possibly envisioned the carnage, destruction and bloodshed that would be unleashed once those various conflicts overlapped and became the war it was. That's the point here. We're looking at diff3erent conflicts breaking out and overlapping. What will it look like in five more years? Hopefully not what we saw last time.

      Delete
  3. What concerns me is the excusing or justification of such violence as "resistance." Why, why, why?? I have a FB friend who posted that this was basically Israel's fault because..."colonization/oppression..." I'm nauseated she can't seem to muster the will to condemn the barbaric acts against civilians for what they are...pure evil. If you can't condemn violent acts, what does that say about your own heart? Because clearly you see them as justifiable in some cases, and maybe more so in others.
    But she says nothing about all the colonization Islam has done over the years. The Hagia Sophia... when are we getting that back? Would she condemn the turning of St. Peter's Basilica into a mosque? Sometimes I sympathize with James and John wanting to call down fire from Heaven, LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The greater narrative of our time is that anything remotely to do with the West is alone the cause of evil and suffering in the world. While Hamas appears to want to destroy that narrative and almost draw other countries in by its horrible atrocities, there are enough who have believed that narrative, including in our own country. The press is largely downplaying it, but almost immediately we've seen supporters of Palestine, and even Hamas, rally to defend them. This shouldn't surprise us. For generations now, young people have been indoctrinated into this narrative, from schools and colleges to the media and entertainment industry, to even the assumptions that conservatives and religious leaders will tacitly accept. And it has gotten worse. As my son who went through college pointed out, there were classmates who really believe America exceeds the evil of anything in history, Nazi Germany included. Likewise, the greater West, and anything to do with it, is equally culpable. And being kids, and the following generations, it's logical that they will take this and run with it to the next level. So now, some of them are the ones rushing about praising Hamas, or at lest excusing them. This is the Frankenstein monster that the Left has created.

      Delete
    2. Then I hope the Left gets eaten first, lol. But seriously... if they pull up the draft and I’m being called on to give my sons to some sort of “service”... I say kids of Biden voters first. I don’t want my sons serving this administration. And I hate that I even say that. But I don’t see the military as serving the nation at this time.

      Delete
    3. Oops... that was me

      Delete
    4. My sons had been primed to consider service in the military when they were young. But by the time our country took the radical shift in the Obama years, I concluded it was not something I would recommend. On their own, they decided to avoid service. As one of them said, this is not the country to fight for, as much of its current fighting is against what we value as Americans.

      Delete

Let me know your thoughts