In the article “Pope Francis calls refugee centers concentration camps; Jewish group says there’s no comparison” (April 23, 2017) Cleve R. Wootson Jr. from The Washington Post writes:
In Greece, Interior Minister Panagiotis Kouroublis, touring the Idomeni camp on the border with Macedonia, compared it to a concentration camp. Idomeni was where a photo emerged of two Syrian parents washing their newborn baby, Bayan, in a puddle.
“I do not hesitate to say that this is a modern-day Dachau, a result of the logic of closed borders,” he said. “Whoever comes here takes several blows to the stomach.”
I haven't been to any refugee camp or any detention center; yet, I get a blow in my stomach every time I read anything about migrants.
What would happen if they let loose those people? Let everybody go wherever they wish. Our comfort would be perturbed, let it be. Seriously, let hell break loose. This is hell for so many people. Let it be hell for us too. I mean of course I don't want hell for myself. I am no masochist. I want to go on living my life free from hassle. But I want the same thing on behalf of everybody.
Let's not pretend. As Pope Francis says these are “discarded people”.
Say it openly, this is Nazi Germany. This is eugenics. Just of a different kind. Those who were born poor or those who were unlucky enough to have war break where they lived, who had natural disasters, who were targets of racial hatred... they are randomly “killed” by states who have imposed borders and employ border controls. The only difference between a direct genocide and migrant deaths being in the randomness of it, people being “killed” not in concentration camps but while trying to move around the world they were born on, and their being killed by “nature”, i.e. drowning at sea, or suffocating while hiding under trucks... Yet, the main, the root reason for their deaths is the same: Borders. So big big people who are running countries can pretend to be busy doing a serious job: that of protecting their borders and wring their hands off of these deaths. They have the “international laws” on their side.
In fact, the Pope has made a concentration camp analogy to refugee centers. And David Harris, the chief executive of the American Jewish Committee said “Precision of language and facts is absolutely essential when making any historical reference...” Well... I agree with him. But not only when making any historical reference, precision of language and facts is always absolutely essential.
I'm sorry, if you call the death of Armenians a genocide when they were forced from their homes during harsh winter conditions, you have to call what is going on today by the same name. Even if you don't call migrant deaths genocide, killing is killing. Just don't pretend to be doing things according to some “rules” and “laws” you have set. Just don't. The deaths of tens of thousands in the Mediterranean and elsewhere, deaths of migrants are the collateral damage of (Y)our borders. All political leaders of the world have blood on their hands, whether by will or by consequence, makes no difference.
In the Guardian article “Human migration will be a defining issue of this century. How best to cope?” subtitled “Whether they are fleeing armed conflict or economic deprivation – or both – people will continue trying to cross borders in search of a decent life, and the global community needs to address this” (20 September 2015) Alexander Betts writes:
“States continue to pursue the politically expedient fiction that they can unilaterally assert sovereign control over immigration but the reality is more complex.”
Sovereign control over immigration is an expedient fiction alright. If only people knew and accepted this. It's true that the reality is more complex too. Just as the reality about open borders would be too, and I accept that.
“Throughout the crisis, a debate has been on whether it is a “migrant” or a “refugee” crisis. It has been important for the public to understand that most people coming to Europe have been from refugee-producing countries and that “refugees” have a particular set of rights under international law. Furthermore, people have a right to seek asylum, and have their claims to refugee status adjudicated.”
Yes, exactly. We are just losing time and energy over a, sorry again but, stupid definition and discussing if we have an obligation to this person or not. This is ridiculousness and idiocy at its premium, at its utmost top! Instead of arguing over this, just focus on the real issue and do something about a real problem, do something helpful. Something that will be of use to someone. Immigration officers trying to assess people's situation, immigration lawyers spending time and energy to defend people, and those people spending money and going through so much hardship... This is really c-r-a-z-y. Trying to distinguish if people are “genuine” refugees or economic migrants, spending so much time, money, resources on such a task is INSANITY in capital letters. And the world is run by people who believe in such a thing. People who have set up such a system. People who are devoid of all logic and reason and people who kill all logic and reason.
How do people “prove” that their lives was under threat in their country of origin? What documents do they need to provide? How do they prove they are atheists who were persecuted? Do they need to “demonstrate” they are homosexuals? How does one prove they belong to the persecuted minority groups, how do you prove your faith, the faith which is only in one's heart?
Who cares if a person is a refugee or an economic migrant? I mean if you want to distinguish and help accordingly, do it on a personal level; individuals may choose to help someone or not, but what business is it of the state? Be they refugees or simply migrants, these are all people who are in need of a decent life, obviously. A life we all want for ourselves.
“The world as a whole lacks a vision for how to respond to the changing nature of displacement. So much of the current “crisis” is not a crisis of numbers but a crisis of politics. We need bold leadership that correctly and honestly articulates the causes of movement and outlines global solutions.”
Yes, it's true we need bold leadership. We need bold leadership to confess this classifying people into nationhood, this setting up borders has all been an insanity. An insanity, I don't know, caused by some sort of virus injected into our bloods by aliens who want to ruin our world... I mean even such an explanation makes more sense than believing that we are run by “leaders” who truly believe in this thing they are doing. Any person with the tiniest bit of a brain should be able to see the insanity of all that is happening in the world today. Putting money on walls, fences, police, security instead of humans and infrastructure. Seriously... Any person with the tiniest bit of a brain would see the insanity of their rules and regulations and laws and conventions.... Any person with the tiniest bit of a brain really would...
Unfortunately, that tiniest bit of a brain seems to have been hijacked or put out of order by aliens. Yes yes, evil aliens with bad intentions must be interfering with the minds of the world population. There is no other explanation of how we can be in such a state given the brains that produce the technology of today.
Or, of course, this world is simply a dream. That I will be waking up from one day... I'll take a deep breath and say “Wheeeew! That was so intense! Sure glad it is over and it was all just a dream.”
“Why denying refugees the right to work is a catastrophic error”... That's the title of the article in the Guardian of 22 March 2017, written by Paul Collier and Alexander Betts.
Big big people, professors at Oxford University write such articles. With all due respect to their knowledge and expertise... I am appalled! I am appalled at the... I don't want to say this but for lack of a more appropriate word... the idiocy of it all!
Is this a serious piece? It is. I am afraid it is. I know it is and I am appalled.
Two professors at Oxford University wrote this piece and a highly respectable newspaper, the Guardian, published it. There is nothing wrong with it, they are just defending the rights of migrants or rather refugees, right? Sure, they are. However, they are also accepting a ridiculous status-quo as the norm, they are basing their arguments on an outrageous premise: The premise that people can be “not allowed” to work!
Is “the right to work” really any argument to take seriously??? Can there be such a thing? I mean there is... but is it something acceptable in the first place? It is an oxymoron. Just like Freedom of Movement, Freedom to Live in Stables, Freedom to Breathe...
We have 193+2 Big Brothers telling us what we can do. If we can go into their “holy” territory, if we can work, if we can go to the hospital, if we can go to the toilet...
Yes, we are 5 year-old school-children who have to get permission to pee!
Why denying anybody the “right” to work is total madness?
Why denying anybody the “right” to work is being a total asshole?
Sorry for the curse word. But it really is. And I really cannot understand why everybody does not see this. How is it possible that people don't see something which is so transparently clear to me? Or how is it possible that people just look away? How is it possible they sugarcoat, or say these things so “politely” so “lightly”? “Why denying refugees the right to work is a catastrophic error...” Is this political-correctness? F... political correctness. Let's all be politically wrong but morally right.
Ok, they have used a strong adjective: catastrophic. But what are they defining with that word? Mistake. So “denying the right to work” is simply a mistake according to these two Oxford professors!
Why even the concept of a “right to work” is so unacceptable, why such a thing can and should be reason enough to overthrow states?
These should be the correct title of any piece! We are living in a total totalitarian world. And people criticize Erdoğan: “Oh he is authoritarian, oh he is getting into the sultan state of mind, oh he is putting people in jail.” Yes, these may all be correct, or at least have partial truth in them. But no state, let me repeat, no state is any better in my eyes. And YOU, my dears, are putting people in pens, putting people who have done nothing wrong apart from wanting to go someplace on the world that they were born in, you have NO RIGHT to criticize anybody. You are NOT in a position to look from above and say “Ah but these states are bad.” You, the leaders of any state, are all the same kind. (Safe from, I guess Ecuador, which accepts all refugees, and Uganda, which lets people work, and the Vatican, where the Pope is trying, but only trying, to defend migrants.) It's just that some of you put on a nicer face by make-up, that's it. And it's so sad but most people do not see your real ugly face behind that make-up.
“Inevitably, many of those directly affected by it become disillusioned.”
Disillusion disillusion... That's my life. Full of disillusion in people, in institutions. It's either how the managers of “big” companies, editors of “big” newspapers, people who have graduated from best schools behave. No ethics, no logic... No care or attention. This is the world we live in. We don't have time for people, we don't have time for thinking, we do everything superficially.
Collier and Betts write:
Concentrated in a small number of host countries, close to war zones, displaced people have been settled in what have become known as “humanitarian silos”.
Then they say “This strategy undermines autonomy and dignity.”
Just this strategy? Does just this strategy undermine autonomy and dignity?! What about the strategy of blocking certain parts of the world to some people just because of their birthplace? What about requiring visas, requiring work permits, imposing so many fees and bureaucratic paperwork in order to achieve these? What about the police force they use against people who simply want to do normal daily stuff to live? Don't these undermine autonomy and dignity just as much?
“We need to rethink the humanitarian silo. What are the key rights that refugees are entitled to?”
What are the key rights that refugees are entitled to????!!
Oh, right, I forget, you (states) are the ones bestowing rights!
What are the basic human acts that everybody is entitled to? What are those? What does a decent human life entail?
Let's discuss if anybody, or any higher authority has any right in the first place to block or redirect these acts! Let's discuss that first. That is the only thing to discuss. That is the root of the problem.
“For conflicts that persist, integration into another society is necessary: people cannot be left in permanent limbo.”
People cannot be left in permanent limbo! Ah, thank you. People cannot be herded like sheep and told where they can dwell and graze in the first place.
Or can they? Should they be?
Maybe that's where I make a mistake. Make the mistake...
“There has been a polarisation of politics. The right has become more rightwing, the left more leftwing and the centre ground has been decimated. In Europe, the far right is on the rise. Then there is Donald Trump as US president. Across the entire political spectrum, there has been a lurch towards nativism, and populist nationalism has become the common currency of democratic politics.”
Yes, and you feed these people by your “soft”, carefully not trying to go against anybody, or rather not to go against states or the status-quo attitude...
“The challenge now is to consider ways to address alienation and fear.”
“Yes,” I thought at first when I read that sentence. “Finally, a totally correct sentence I can agree on.” But no, that is again misworded. The challenge now is how to stop politicians and some media pumping up alienation and fear. How to expose their biggest lie... The lie that we are separated into our nationhoods.
“Politicians face the dilemma of how to reconcile democracy and refuge in ways that can take majoritarian politics with them.”
Oh democracy again... that word I loathe.
But yes, taking majoritarian politics is important. I have to give that one. You may say all the correct things, you will never succeed or get anywhere. In fact, that's what happens to people who talk sense. They get ignored. Their ideas are not noisy and not popular as they are not mainstream.
“Opinion polls tell us that public concern about asylum is not about numbers; it is about a perceived loss of control.”
Loss of control... Good point. People want control. Perhaps they want control that is too unrealistic, too superficial. They don't want to accept that life cannot be controlled.
“It makes sense to protect most refugees close to home.”
It makes sense... Ah, does it?
Does it make sense to let people go wherever they wish, does that make any sense to you? Or does this, states having the right to dictate and decide who can go where make sense to you? I am afraid it's the latter.
“These rights are in the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees.”
We are still at a convention written in 1951. 1951! That is almost 70 years ago. Okay, let's be specific and say 66 years ago. The world we live in today is not the same as even that of 10 years ago. And you are stuck in 1951! Seriously... Come to your senses... Whoever the “leaders” of this world are! “Oh, some of our former colleagues wrote this convention back in the day. See? How we are obliged to obey that.”
Ridiculous ridiculous ridiculous. Nothing but ridiculous!
There is so much effort put into distinguishing between refugees and migrants, plus the sub-categories that it's unbelievable!
In the booklet of the Refugee Council “Tell it like it is- The truth about Refugees and Asylum- Separating the facts from the fiction” it says:
“The 1951 Refugee Convention guarantees everybody the right to apply for asylum.
It has saved millions of lives.
No country has ever withdrawn from it.”
Withdraw from it! All of you, withdraw from it. But also take your dirty hands off of people going about their ordinary lives as well.
“The denial of the right to work has had catastrophic consequences for many refugees, leading to a long-term erosion of skills and aspirations, and often exacerbating a sense of alienation and hopelessness.”
Yes, that sense of alienation and hopelessness, that erosion of skills and more importantly aspirations is another biggest crime all states commit against humanity.
By the way, about the right to work... Work will change its meaning soon. But in the meantime, let people do whatever they can. Just let them.
I mean it's not as if I am asking for a special thing from governments/states. It's not as if they have to go out of their way to help anybody, to find them work etc. It's that they go out of their way to block people from moving. They go out of their way, they sick the police on them to not let them work! Can you believe it??
“If our duty is to restore the lives of displaced people to something as close to normality as possible, reestablishing their autonomy should be high on the agenda.”
If our duty is to restore the lives of displaced people... Our duty is not to restore, our first duty should be to not allow governments, higher authorities to infringe the rights of anybody on this planet.
“Rarely have economists thought about refugees. The dominant assumption has been that they are are a humanitarian matter, and so studies have been led by lawyers and anthropologists.”
Oh no no. Economists think about refugees. They claim refugees will be good for the economy. They are after their own interests... They see people as commodities to be used to other people's ends.
“It makes economic sense to begin to break down arbitrary boundaries to refugees’ economic participation.”
See? That's exactly what I was talking about. The authors of this piece do the same thing. People argue with the fact of economic sense. They do not mention the senselessness and the insolence of states to impose a block on people to work. They accept the status quo as the “normal”. As if there is anything normal about it! As if there is any sense in it in the first place.
Arrggghhhh! I am literally pulling out my hair at this point. Do I really want to go on reading this piece??
“We need to change how we think about refugees’ needs.”
We need to change the way we classify people according to where they come from. We need to change how we think about states' rights. And instead focus on the rights of humans.
“How can we move from a focus on vulnerabilities towards recognising and building their capacities? Rather than seeing refugees as an inevitable burden, how can we find ways in which they can be a benefit?”
Yes, how? First of all, you need to change your vocabulary. When you label someone a “refugee” you are degrading them to a needy person. You cannot move away from a focus on vulnerabilities as long as you keep using that label “refugee”. Vulnerability is inside the definition. The response is automatic. Ah, that is of course, given that you accept them to be “genuine” refugees, if you do not see them as “economic migrants” or “welfare leeches” or any other degrading term some people use.
Oh yes, I bet people love being refugees, they love obtaining refugee status, they love being classified as “refugees” instead of being individuals with a name.
A name of their own! Well... That should be the title of one of my books if I can get around to write it from dealing with such ludicrous arguments as “the right to work”. We have to move a step forward. I can understand the general “public”, the “common” man, but Oxford professors??!... I'm really sorry. My shoulders sink, I am disheartened.
I seek refuge in chocolate. It doesn't help. It is just a way of self-harm. I imagine making a cut on my leg with a knife... Diabetes is at least a sweeter harm and is unbloody.
“Instead of being viewed as just passive victims of humanitarian disaster, how might they be seen as potential agents of development?
This requires a vision.”
Yes yes, it all requires a vision. It requires a vision to see that everybody should have “equal” access to the Earth we are all born on! It requires a vision to see that states have hijacked a basic right and we, I mean most people, are recognizing that right of states but not of people! We are all complicit in this crime.
“few are able to access formal work permits, either because they are prohibitively expensive or because of the restrictive bureaucratic process.”
Ah yes, here comes another lovely part! Work permits! You have to pay an extortion fee to the bandit called the state in order to be able to work!
How can I make that more ridiculous??
Ah yes, there is also all the bureaucratic paperwork, it doesn't finish with just paying the extortion fee. Not so simple folks... Know your place! You are the rat in the maze.
“When pushed to offer greater economic participation to refugees, Jordan has generally responded with two big concerns, relating to development and security.
One concern relates to competition for economic resources. In particular, Jordanians are worried about competition for jobs, downward pressure on wages, upward pressure on house prices, and the depletion of natural resources such as water.”
Those are not concerns only for Jordan, they are concerns for any population receiving refugees or migrants. They are legitimate concerns too. But if we are not going to call for genocide or the random killing of babies at the moment they are born, then we have to find a way, a solution to live together. Somehow...
It's either we all float or we all sink.
“One finds pockets of extraordinary resilience and innovation among the Syrian refugee community in Jordan. In the Zaatari refugee camp, home to around 80,000 Syrians, there is no right to work and all economic activity is supposed to be highly regulated by the government. But creativity abounds. The bustling main market street known as the Shams-Élysées – a play on words that references the Paris shopping district and the historic name for Syria – is lined with shops and small businesses. Despite strict access controls at the entrance to the camp, seemingly every product imaginable – from cosmetics to textiles to pharmaceuticals to pets – can be purchased here.
Innovation is on display in other ways. All refugee households are given a caravan, usually made from an old shipping container, to live in. Yet many of these caravans are reconverted: they might be moved across the camp, become shops along the Shams-Élysées or converted into furniture. A black-market construction trade smuggles bricks and cement into the camp, enabling further upgrades and extensions. Across the camp, one finds endless illustrations of inventiveness and entrepreneurship: urban gardening, striking murals and community-led journalism, to name just a few.
While some of this informal activity is tolerated, most is formally prohibited and selectively dismantled. The Jordanian police make occasional raids to shut down some forms of business, either because they have become too large, or for more vindictive reasons. Meanwhile, irrational contradictions pervade camp life: hundreds of Jordanian teachers are employed at great expense to teach Syrian children according to the Jordanian national curriculum, while hundreds of qualified Syrian teachers are left idle. The suppression and neglect of skills, talents and aspirations benefits nobody. What if instead refugees were allowed to join the labour market?”
Yeah what if?... What a great idea! Just allow refugees to join the labour market.
What if governments all around the world took their dirty hands off of people when the only thing they do is go about their own business living a normal life or rather trying to live a normal life? What about that??
I read articles about the Italian village thriving because of migrants: “Refugees bring dying Italy village back to life” by Fanny Carrier from AFP.
There is a photo with the caption “Migrants from Senegal and Niger joke with the waitress in the main bar of Sant' Alessio in Aspromonte, a small village of 330 inhabitants in Calabria”
The piece starts with “In the foothills of the Aspromonte mountains in southern Italy, the silence of a once-dying village is broken by the laughter of a small group of refugees.” It goes on giving information about the project and tells the remark of an elderly man: "They behave well. They live independent lives but often lend a helping hand."
“Sitting in the sunshine and watching the world go by from his front garden, 89-year old Antonio Sacca -- who spent 54 years working in a Turin factory before returning home -- says he likes his new neighbours.”
I read the French opening up their chateau... “French village opens its chateau as home from home for refugees” on UNHCR website by Céline Schmitt.
Gerard Dubois, the mayor of Pessat-Villeneuve, the small village in central France says “Hatred is noisy. Solidarity is quiet but inspiring and effective.”
Then I read the comments. Some people mention how awful it has become in Australia, that there are Sudanese gangs on the beaches in daylight etc. Then, of course, there are those pieces in certain newspapers tarring refugees and migrants, calling them cockroaches, talking about being swarmed, telling how they bring diseases, they rape, they steal etc.
I understand the well-meaning efforts of UNHCR and others trying to paint all refugees/migrants as contributors to society. But why can't they be objective and say that there are bad ones too?
Don't get me wrong. I just love the picture that these stories portray:
“The village is currently home to an Iraqi Kurdish family, a Gambian couple with a baby and young people from Ghana, Nigeria, Mali and Senegal.” I love this idea of people from so different places coming together.
Then you read this:
“There is a special project for the most vulnerable, including HIV-positive people, diabetics, victims of prostitution networks, a deaf and dumb couple, and a young woman whose toddler son was shot dead in Libya and husband is feared drowned.”
And you are once again reminded of all the things people are going through. You feel you need to lend a hand.
Gerard Dubois even received death threats after proposing to open up the chateau owned by the town council to refugees. He says “I would have resigned if the decision to open the accommodation centre had been ‘no’.”
I admire such people with such integrity, and I am very glad to know of their existence in this world.
On the other hand, I also understand the people objecting to migrants, being afraid etc. But why can't they accept it's not every migrant who is bad? Why can't they understand even if the situation is so it's our society and conditions that forces, or okay, let me not even say force- but is a trigger to these acts?
In any group, it's obvious that there are going to be the bad ones and the good ones. Why can't any side be neutral and true to reality?
I understand, we all want to confirm our biases whenever we read something. Still... Why can't we just be objective?
Why do we have to beautify or beastify? Of course, if you want to generalize, it's better to paint people with the same brush instead of tainting them with the same brush. But in the end, people are people. We are all the same. Good and bad.
"People are people so why should it be
You and I should get along so awfully
So we're different colours
And we're different creeds
And different people have different needs
It's obvious you hate me
Though I've done nothing wrong
I never even met you
So what could I have done
I can't understand
What makes a man
Hate another man
Help me understand
People are people so why should it be
You and I should get along so awfully
Help me understand
Now you're punching and you're kicking
And you're shouting at me
I'm relying on your common decency
So far it hasn't surfaced
But I'm sure it exists
It just takes a while to travel
From your head to your fist
I can't understand
What makes a man
Hate another man
Help me understand"
This song takes me to my youth. The Depeche Mode of 1984.
They have made a remastered video in 2006 which portrays the unfortunate world we live in.
I can actually understand what makes a man hate another man. There are so many reasons. The most fundamental one being a conflict of interest, and then differences in seeing the world, differences in understandings and values. I can understand the hate when you know someone personally. It's easy to love people from afar, it's when you interact with them comes the difficult part. Perhaps that's why the commandment is “Love thy neighbor” and not “Love humanity.” Loving humanity is easy. I mean as a misanthrope I do not like humans much. But I have no general hate towards anyone. I just wish some people to stay away from me, that's all.
“I never even met you...” says Depeche Mode.
Yes, you've never even met me... Me, the migrant.
“I can't understand
What makes a man
Hate another man”
That I cannot understand either... Hating someone without even meeting them, hating a group of people. Tarring people born some place, tarring people who move in pursuit of happiness with the same brush... Those are beyond me.
“Help me understand”
So sorry, I cannot help you understand...
Maybe there is someone out there who can make us understand.
Or maybe... My only answer could be: “It's because of the way politicians have set up the world game.” That's why I believe we need to change it.
A couple of hours later:
Oh... I may have one more answer: It might be the stupidity of men. Unfortunately, there isn't much to do about that. We need to wait until we grow up a bit more and mature as humanity.
Crumble the Walls, Long Live the Tunnels
“Turkey has announced the completion of a three-metre high fortification along its border with Syria to prevent refugees and smugglers entering the country.
The completed 556-kilometre section is the first phase of a structure that will eventually seal the entire 911-kilometre border between the two countries.
The rest of the wall is due to be completed by the autumn, at which point it would be the second-longest structure in the world, after the 3,460-kilometre Great Wall of China.”
“At 1,600 kilometres in length, Trump's wall will eventually beat the Turkish wall into second place as the world's longest.
The Israeli West Bank barrier, under construction between Israel and the West Bank, will be 650 kilometres long when complete.”
When I read this news in Dezeen "Turkey completes first phase of 900km wall along Syrian border” by Marcus Fairs (25 April 2017) I smiled bitterly and said to myself “So we have done it!”
We've done better than Trump. Done it secretly without creating such a fuss. I guess this is going to be our pride, when we should be proud of Diyarbakır.
Reading some more I came across “Why the wall on the Mexican border won’t happen” by Elaine Kamarck (April 25, 2017)
“And, of course, with any wall, there are tunnels. The United States has found 150 tunnels under the U.S.-Mexico border since the 1990s.”
Hahahaha! I laughed so much when I read this. “Hail to Tunnels!” I thought. “Crumble the Walls, Long Live the Tunnels.”
The allegory of building bridges is outdated in our age. We are left to tunnels.
Bridges are out, tunnels are in!
Being only a witness to all the human suffering must be the worst disease of our age. Because that's what we do nowadays. We have access to the information, to the news about what's going on in almost every place in the world; however, as we cannot take it all in, as it is over-human to feel the pain of everybody, -that's a weight not even Atlas can carry,- we become inured to it all.
Ah yes, we have social media and we sometimes react to some news like Trump's travel ban. But then we do not question the premise that such an action is based on. We accept national sovereignty to be over freedom of movement. We become inured to all imbecilic pain and trouble imposed by states. We accept the status quo. We accept the world that has been presented to us as is. We become simple actors in a cheap soap-opera that we call life.
It's like in the movie Slumdog Millionaire... We forget about the boy whose eyes are carved out as if ice-cream balls to make him a beggar and dance to the happy music at the end.
None of the leaders of the world can be a patch on this donkey! (Oh, I should keep Pope Francis out, he is the only one trying. He actually can be considered out as Vatican is only an observer in the UN.)
See? Even this donkey is smart enough to think of removing an obstacle whereas we humans, or rather our politicians are busy building up obstacles to block movement.
And it's important to remove obstacles for others, not just jump over ourselves. I am now trying to do that. I cannot do it on my own.
Looking for unreasonable minds, looking for sponsors, looking for people who will burn their passports with me.
In his TED Talk Pope Francis says:
I often find myself wondering: "Why them and not me?" I, myself, was born in a family of migrants; my father, my grandparents, like many other Italians, left for Argentina and met the fate of those who are left with nothing. I could have very well ended up among today's "discarded" people. And that's why I always ask myself, deep in my heart: "Why them and not me?"
It's interesting... People almost invariably ask “Why me?”
I do not ask that question. “Why me?” I did not ask it when I lost a newborn for no reason. I did not ask it when I rolled over a car. I did not ask it when I had a childhood sickness and had restricted movements. “Why me?” seems a stupid question to me. I mean why should it not be me? Many bad things happen to so many people. Somethings might as well be happening to me too. That's a fact of life. No point in denying.
On the other hand, “Why not me?” is a question that has never occurred to me either.
I do not ask “Why not me?” but I always ask “What if it was me?”
In fact, I ask that question quite often. That's why I always feel outrage when it comes to injustice, when it comes to exploitation. The only thing it serves? Nothing! I only feel helpless. I am just another voiceless person among others. I cannot do anything for all those who are suffering so much, and some so needlessly as well. And it is simply frustrating to be only a witness to it all.
Megadeth's debut studio album was “Killing Is My Business... and Business Is Good!”
Yes, unfortunately, business of killing is good.
The arms dealers profiting from Europe's refugee tragedy” by Mark Akkerman published on TNI (The Transnational Institute) on 04 July 2016 explains this so very well.
THIS is the most important thing that people need to see: That all this fighting and border controls is making the arms dealers and security companies rich. They are the only ones PROFITING from the war and all these tensions. To follow the money is crucial to an understanding of our world and how it functions. Pass the article of Mark Akkerman around. Make people become aware of how we are robbed. How we are manipulated by our fears and needs for security.
Stopping war is perhaps an impossibility. But if you, if we want a chance at peace, we need to do something about it. Start a petition on change.org to stop the production and sale of arms. Start a petition to channel our taxes towards causes we, as the taxpayers, see fit.
These are all things on my list of things to do. When I get a chance to do them! Many people want to change the world for the good and are working on it. I have an ambition to change the world too. Give me a hand. Share, retweet, contribute, Strike At The Root!
Peace is On Sale... But Nobody is Buying