On War and its Disdain

[i.uomini 2552]

A brief discourse upon Statecraft and the conflicts shared against peoples

 

--------------------------------------------------

[Chapter I: States & Struggle]

 

The collection and arrangement of peoples, such as is common across the foundations of every civilization, tends to occur with a relative unanimity; for only by the suspension of individual prerogatives can the collective come together in approach to a common goal. And how can a functioning state be formed otherwise? Where something must be built, a state of vacancy must previously prevail; and this vacancy asserts itself for the domination of the weaker wills, and the weakest of these flee to venues more suited to the follower, steadfastly scornful of the leader. And so, some stay, and others depart - just too as some busy themselves with craft, and others idle. Herein is the creation of Community.

The people, then, are the life and blood which animate the State; giving blueprints to its prosperity, and taking command of the levers which enable favorable conditions upon those who call themselves ‘countrymen’; herein is the realization of Government. By the network of mutual interests shared by the people, whom compose the government, these desires are pursued - fervently by some, and passively by others. The ways in which these desires are to be met are the subject of the most fundamental debates, in other words, the split in the road upon which the spirit of the people must choose to tread, either in this direction or that. Herein is the realization of Politics.

 

Achievement of designs, from the foundations laid, is again, a collective effort; and it follows from this, that all the acts of a citizen are merely a realization of the wills and ways of his community. Accounting for the deviation in opinions natural to gatherings of any size (for factions of a people will always inspire subjective factions intent on manifesting particular phenomena), the actions of a State then, must necessarily satisfy recognition as the enacted spirits present in the movements of the people, their government.

From the prior point arrives struggle and strife. For these factional distinctions and differences breed animosity. It is not long from a feeble Sovereign’s death that his adherents begin to resent the excessive inheritances of power perceived by each one against the others (each wanting the full measure for himself); then having this condition of many heads upon 1 body, the State is not able to tolerate itself - the success of one citizen defining the ruin of the other, verbal policy alone is no longer sufficient to resolve irreconcilable differences; and from this condition, springs rebellion, civil war, and cruelty entirely undeserved by those who suffer the most of its insolence. It is now observed that escalations pass from theoretical disagreements into physical ones with a dangerous haste, and \ with no shortage of justifications to embolden the execution of its people’s policies.

There is no substantive distinction then, between the interactions of one community with another in the boundaries of a State, and in the interactions between a State with her counterpart within a wider regional boundary. Governments (which it is reminded, are the collections of the people’s influence) proximate to eachother, find no lack of common interests, and are frequently brought close by the ever-present conflict which necessarily occurs in every surrounding sphere; promising dangers to all. Yet still, the discovery of Irreconcilable Differences presents inherent dangers with enough spiritual sway, such that even factions of kin seek to exact one’s will upon the other by materialized force; and there is no war so hated by the God as a war amongst kin. Nevertheless, The Lord Omnipotent did not divine that more food ought to exist than man could eat - nor did he raise up the trees from gold and steel, but of wood unfit for universal wealth. And so where one has, another must not. As regards the contention of one state with another, wherever one people has exerted policies of force sufficient to achieve victory, the other must necessarily relinquish the possession of that benefit.

 

--------------------------------------------------

[Chapter 2: Construction of War]

 

The instruments and infrastructure of war cannot, as similarly said before, be shown as different to those of any other mass necessity; for where builders need hammers in their workshops, and physicians need botanicals in their laboratories, soldiers require arms in their bastions. Where one houses the people, the other maintains their health… the last both preserves and promotes their sovereignty. And such is done, fundamentally, by the same means in every case; eliminating the opposing faction’s willingness to continue resistance to the demands of his enemy. 

It is not only through blood and arms that resistance is dispersed however. States reliant upon the sword have no refuge when their strength fails to meet their contender; but those well-composed states whom have built homes upon rock and not sand, will have measures innumerable to conclude conflict amicably, and without great destruction. From this follows wars of trade- closing of ports, dismantling of tradeships, culminating in the sabotage of the enemy’s very capability to threaten war, let alone sustain it. In the diplomatic realm, there shows themselves a select few envoys of great promise, capable not only of maintaining friendships between states, but also building upon a foundation of mutual interest across an entire region, and forming a coalition of peoples, together dedicated to common defense and the prevention of ill-guided conflicts against the combined spheres of influence. Finally, that detestable selection of actors, unfaithful to discipline and the rules of justice; these seek to gain the outcome of their policies by intrigues, calumny, and assassination.

These above methods, while varying in their degrees of reliability, collectively comprise the conflicts in which Peoples engage against eachother. All avenues used in tandem, seek to fulfill the fundamental aim of overturning the enemy’s desire, instead asserting the will of one’s own faction as truth.

 

It will occur to every soldier and captain, prior to the onset of bloody battle, what colossal improvement could show itself, if only these gathered masses behind himself against and the other, could spare the energies of war into better worlds. How many shipping canals, how many wonderous cathedrals, how many new crafts could be passed to the next generation; giving as their inheritance, cooperation instead of hatred?

The answer of course, does not present itself before that onset of force contending for the life of one policy against the other’s, each seeking to throw the other down to the base earth, and rise above to be standing over his opponent’s stiff remains. But since now, I compose these thoughts from the study, and not the frontline, the luxury of time is upon me, and I may begin to approach the subject.

In other places it has been said that ‘community’ is the condition of being common in unity; literally, many being as one, under the ordinance of God which is the origin of our species. As a family composes a village, their inter-connectivity is that which enables the manifestation of a better environment (for some with weak arms will excel in the arts of commerce; while others weak of mind will excel at construction's labor). As a network of villages composes a Kingdom, such enables the same to fulfill all aspects of life necessary to prosperity of individuals; who, as they compose families, must be well upheld in order to allow the effective contribution of the household. Where then, is the cancer of society located? I determine that it must lie within the very whims of nature which civilization seeks to replace with more refined focuses. For a lazy man, by his demanding community, is encouraged to persist in his work. A selfish man, by his taxing community, is compelled to give of what he has for the benefit of his neighbor. Even a gluttonous man, when bid by his governance to lay his delicacies aside, learns a discipline necessary for the improvement of those people around him, and by their improvement, their whole world’s. Easy it is for all to see, that at the rejection of civilization's finer values, the base and animalistic urge offers its fruits, while hiding the truth of its consequences; by these causes, negotiation and tactful communication becomes an altogether foreign concept to the community.

Therefore it is seen that although many will come to greet you with gathered arms and not treaties (these factions being incompatible to community), against these you must be prepared to enact their overturn. But afterward, when the necessity for opposition is dissipated, nature puts us all under obligation to rejoin discourse with a common policy, lest our tongues become useless, and fall from our mouth because of our lack of wisdom.

 

--------------------------------------------------

[Chapter 3: Error of Avoidance]

 

As just now said, the presence of aggression upon one’s State, the collective influence of its people, is not relevant to matters of question, but of time. Against all proper operation of Statecraft, some factions have pre-determined a policy of another State’s ruin, or by their continuance, necessitate an undermining of the factors critical to the prosperity of their enemy. Again we come to the topic of ‘irreconcilable differences’. With this in mind, a mistake is no more obvious than in demanding the compromise of such opposite policies; for dismemberment met in the middle with status quo, cannot be amicable to both parties. And worse, each contender advocating for one and the other outcome, the latter of the 2 campaigns for his own partial dissolution.

 

Do not consider that refusal to take up arms presents moral fortitude, as is mistaken among citizens of our day. Fortitude is shown by the citizenry’s willingness to employ every policy available to them, with intelligence, in the preservation of their common flourishing against the enemy, whether in spirit or of State. It is quite obvious that nothing done by a collection of citizens can be separated from their portion of the influences present in the governance of the people; it then follows that a State is strong, and deserving of their preservation, only if it can be maintained by the combined policies of the collected populace.

 

 

[Yeetboy0206 1574]

Eden reads this and almost screams to the heavens in rage at the fact that war was coming to the East once more, and she could not do anything to stop it from coming to her doorstep.