Saying we learn to live in warzones... Another comment on The Economist read “There was a time when people stayed and defended their homeland.”
Ah yes, those nostalgic good old times! There may be a truth in the statement but I guess it overlooks a very important change. In those days, people didn't have guns and bombs and mass weapons. If someone started bombing my home, what am I to do to defend it? Grab my kitchen knife and wave at the bombers and scare them away?! What is my husband to do? Try to find a gun from somewhere somehow and kill as many as possible before we are all killed as a family? Plus, if it is to be so, why are we feeding armies with our tax money? Is it so that they protect us, or is it so that they can attack us or go and attack others?
Certainly, civilians have mobilized and fought alongside soldiers in independence wars. But those days are left behind now, societies change, the nature of wars change. While people's roots and feelings of belonging diminish in a more globalized world, they are fueled on the other side to keep the war and fear atmosphere alive so that some people can hold the power and fill up their pockets. If there isn't an enemy to fear how are they supposed to claim to defend you and stay on their thrones? Whether wars are fought for land, for natural resources, for democracy, for ideals, for ideologies or for gratification of power is another topic for discussion. Ordinary people want to live their life in peace. If they are let, of course. I personally do not ever want to be involved in somebody else's war. This case of defending refugees and migrants, I took it up myself because I see it as a fight against an injustice in a global scale. If somebody makes an attempt at my family's life, I might kill someone one day, but apart from that, I'm not sure I'd be willing to take up arms for anything. The groups fighting these wars have the tanks and bombs and all the weaponry. And supposedly they are not to attack civilians. But there lies the trouble, it generally remains as supposed. If somebody destroys my house, I get up and leave and seek to set up another life for myself and my family. Anyone with any sense of logic and brains in them would do the same instead of face certain annihilation.
No, those tales of heroism and defending the “homeland” is not left in the past. But the first thing, even to fight for your homeland, is to survive. Some choose to stay and fight and die if necessary. Some choose to leave. And I don't believe anyone has a right to judge these people's choices, to tell them what they should be doing. Please shut your mouth up about those, especially like the Syrians, who are surrounded from all sides and who do not even know what they should fight for or against who, those that have become weary of living in a constant state of terror and deprivation wanting to get up and leave and set themselves up a decent human life in a safer place, as relocating in their own country is impossible. Those that do not believe in nationalism, those that cannot stand talks of patriotism are not obliged to abide by what you or some other people/groups think they should be doing! Governments and their imposition of laws and rules is a completely another story because they have taken the power from the people and they do NOT have the right to initiate the use of power unnecessarily and/or unjustly.
Final word on this: What homeland are you talking about? This earth is my homeland.
Not many people really want to leave their homes, homelands unless forced to. We like where we grow up. Feeling home is good.
Sham had tweeted this photo as an answer to the question
"Why don't refugees go back to where they come from?"
"I'm sure they'd love to go back even to this, to reconstruct it, if only there was peace and security there for them."