I admit that I feel bad by giving up with my cause.. By giving up and letting the rope go out of my hands. But hey! Isn't that what life is? I mean in this relatively (valued) world where what is wrong and what is right is SUBJECTED to one's perception of such?
I mean yeah there is indeed a demarcation line between a "good and bad" set-up by the majority in the society but you must also admit that this line is not that straight. In our small line of sight, we see this line straight ONLY because we only see that of ours. I find somebody's values system "ugh" because it was way crooked when compared to mine (needless to say, we impose that ours as the right and appropriate one).
I have a proposal! Why not rather than seeing the "ugh" we find those whom we share common principles? Isn't that better?.. And sounds familiar? Yeah that's how nations were built (as the Preamble of OUR constitution states: "..that shall embody OUR ideals and aspirations.. conserve and develop OUR patrimony..." ) people having the same goals and beliefs congregate and working together towards a common goal!
Yes that seems to be an ideal world but hey! What if two completely opposite faction meet? Then CONFLICT is inevitable. Conflict coming from our strong belief that our ideals are the just one and the opposite is trash.. That China owns the Scarborough Shoal historically and Philippines even though near doesn't have the rights to the island. The "need" of Abu Sayyaf to establish an Islamist government. etc... That you cannot form a mixture between oil and water...
For the latter there's soap but how about the rest? COMPROMISE (i.e. treaties). For me, wala namang nanalo sa war. Well.. ideally meron IF napatay mo ang ENTIRE RACE at ang allies and sympathizers ng opponent mo which is IMPOSSIBLE. Because if not, ANY SURVIVOR no matter how innocent or few they are will surely be vengeful and in time can lead to another full-scale war.
Then again I state compromise.. The two factions SHALL..no.. MUST meet in the middle compromising some of their principles just to peacefully coexist. Btw, this is not only applicable to wars between nation but in fact is also applicable to clashes of culture,tradition,beliefs between or anything that may hinder the peaceful coexistence.
(5.1.13 update)
I would like to highlight the "what-if" statement in the fourth paragraph. When can we say to ourselves that we have the right to criticize someone's value system? There are three factors for me:
1. You genuinely care for that person
2. You are obliged to coexist and interact with that person
3. He/She is destructive to you
I won't go too personal in defending my claims. Dun nalang tayo sa generic. Pero kung gusto nyo talaga. Read my previous entries and correlate. :D
(1) Like the concern of a parent to his/her child's welfare..or even a friend. Actually maipapasok pala dito ang konsepto ng ALTRUISM -- increasing someone's "fitness" by compromising yours. The doer of the deed in this scenario obviously has nothing to gain yet does the action anyways for the benefit of the receiver.
(2) Our public-servants! Because we are obliged to co-exist with them...and in fact do transactions with them as long as we're in Philippines or even when we need something from the Government (which is inevitable)! I don’t need to say more why. :D
(3) Baseless and nonsense (although some has this “pseudo-basis”) opinion. Those who didn’t fret to step on someone just to get up FAST in the ladder of life to state a few.
Personally, if you're ass-behavior doesn't match anything on my list then I don't care about your life. Go on, live your life and don't forget to be merry. ☺☺☺
I would like to end this post with a Jason Mraz track 5/6. Enjoy! :D
No comments:
Post a Comment