This is the
last chapter of this book, and what comes next I don’t know.
As you
surely realised, this book, which I started in September, dramaticaly changed
it’s course with the war that started after the Oct 7 attacks and subsequent
war. A lot of what I would write sounds a little naive to me now, altough I’m
sure there was also good stuff that will come out in it time. Well, it is what
it is.
Anyway, in
oct 7 2023, the terror group Hamas invaded Israel and did the worst possible
things they could in the most diabolical way possible, taking hostages with
them in the way back. Now, 7 months later, there are still 132 people there,
including infants.
For one day, I felt the world was in
solidarity with Israel, but next day people were already taking the streets to
say it happened for a reason, and it was Israel’s fault. Israel hadn’t strike
back yet.
When Israel
did strike back, wich was unavoidable, it became the worst villain, for
academia and most of the press. Also, in november 3, the UN human rights forum
was presided by Iran, who says Israel doesn’t exist, and have obvious ties to
terror organizations including Hamas – and shouldn’t be there for a million
other reasons too.
Iran also presided the UN conference
for disarmament in 2024, in Beijing. Oh, and just for a joke: in december 2023
the big climate conference was in Dubai (Me and my wife laughed so much). How was the Hotel?
When we
think about the Western Civilization, we do find a lot of things to criticize
in it, with all reason. But what we should remember is that those horrible
things: slavery, war, oppression, already existed in the Ancient World. What
took place in the Western Civilization, and in other places that were influenced
by it – and that contributed to it, is a fight between very old things – sometimes dressed as not that old, but in
fact old – and things that pointed to
new possibilities of freedom. Because good people defended individual freedom.
Individualism
may sound like a horrible word to a lot of people nowadays, but it doesn’t mean
selfishness, nor does it exclude comunity. It only means an individual have
freedom to decide his life, and he have value on his own.
I think one of the first individualistic
statements was when the prophet Isaiah said that the sons would not pay for
their fathers crimes. Now it may sound obvious, but it was not at the time. It
was all about nations, and to say that, if a group of people had done you
wrong, you should not take avenge on the next generation, was something really
new, I believe. And doesn’t it make sense? Those new kids weren’t even born. If
your father dies and someone discovers he comited a crime, you don’t want to go
to jail, right?
Respect for an individual is the basis of Freedom. But the
Socialist idea is that you can sacrifice individual freedoms for a more free
future. It means you don’t have to protect the current freedoms, you are
allowed to fight abuses of power with less freedom, fight unhappinness with
less happinness. It means you should bet on a group of people, to go in a
direction that seems the opposite of a dream of beauty, hoping that, once the
enemy is defeated, they will spontaneously turn the gear around and give
freedom and happiness back to everybody. It never happenned. It never will.
We know of
so many horror regimes, where people had to live a life they hated, not allowed
to even whisper their feelings to a companion for fear of being denounced. And
in the end of the day, you look to your future and see that all your days will
be like that, no hope of change to the end of your life. Until new generations
are born who don’t even know the meaning of really dreaming, of real freedom.
Just like radical islamic
dictatorships. People may think that that is just their way as people, that’s
just their culture, but it is not true. Many of these countries lived moments
of modernization, and people had a lot of fun with variated pop music,
different clothes, good literature, profound discussions and so on. Then came
radical islamic revolutions and everything changed.
Imagine someone
was a punk rocker fan of good books, now he can’t be that no more. And more,
maybe his grandson will not know any other pleasure besides spying his fellows,
so that will be life for him. Double disgrace for the guy. Or triple, if he
learns that a lot of people in the west say, “this is just their natural way of
being”. But you can be sure that a lot of people there would welcome freedom with all their heart, if it came.
The powerful
people of some Nations are men for whom slavery is not a bad thing, they really
believe some men are born to rule and others to be slaves. Righteousness for
them is just to ensure that nobody is going to do anything they consider
sinful. Happinness will be brought by God when all men become obedient, a man
don’t have an obligation to help everybody being happy – I am not talking about
all people of a religion, only the interpretation of the bad ones. Also, of
course, women are the eternal servants of men.
And the even
more powerful, the ones that are really on the top, deep inside don’t really
believe even that. They are just greedy psychopats. How can I say that? Because
they are not ashamed to create monsters.
Terrorist
organizations are monsters. They are formed of men who like to kill. In wars,
people die and everybody that has decency knows it’s a bad thing, even if not
completely avoidable. But when you say that killing a civilian is a good thing
in itself, you attract men who have pleasure thinking about that. Men who have
nothing in the heart, whose only pleasure left was to dream of killing people.
Christ, they were laughing all the while.
Imagine a
monster that has installed itself over a piece of land and it is darker than
dark and has thousands of long dark tentacles. It has dominion over the people
in that land, total dominion. And it is a monster because it loves blood, it
laughs when it tortures someone, it delights to see ugliness. This is not a hiperbolic
caricature of someone, those are literal facts.
From time to
time the monster stretches one of his arms to the neighbour land which it wants
to destroy, and kills some people. One day it makes an attack worst and more
horrible than any before, and take some people alive to his belly. But because
it has people in his dominion, there is a price for destroying it.
Now, given
the things the monster has done, the only way people find to say it is not a
monster is to say that there was no other option. If there was another option,
then how to justifiy?
Now, History
tells that the palestinian leaders, after wars, had been offered peace
alternatives as steps towards the restoring of the Two States dream. They
rejected everything. This only makes sense if we make the other side a demon
that can never be negotiated with.
Of course,
it fits the narrative, steeped in Socialist theory, that there is a big
capitalist oppressor there and a victory of the oppressed is necessary. No
other solution is valid. So you make of this case an example, to sell socialist
heroism. But, an example? An illustration? At what cost? This is not a movie.
The cost is
lives, and the cost is truth. Yes, because the Israelis are not lying that
there are not civilian casualties, neither are they trying to prove it is not a
bad thing. But the other side tries to erase the hostages from the mind of
people.
And by the
way, the israelis are not singing from the river to the sea, meaning the other
must go forever. There may be a radical minority, but they are far from
representing the general, and the official, position. The practical steps
toward peace are not very clear to anybody right now, I believe, but what they are
talking about is eliminating Hamas, not more. Smart and creative people will
come with ideas, I believe, to make peace possible.
But you must
decide if you want to be remembered as part of the people who pushed jews against
the wall for no clear gain for nobody, or someone who knew that Terror could
not be part of any solution.
They created
the expression “State Terrorism” to use wrong deeds of states to empty the word
“terrorism” of it’s meaning, it’s horrible meaning. Any State have flaws that
must be dealt with, but terrorist organizations, unlike Democratic States, are
build with the only purpose of spilling blood, they have no other occupation,
they don’t have chance of improving and they don’t include good people.
With
Democratic States there is hope for more Freedom and Peace, with Terror and
Anarchy – which is law of the strongest in a very raw way – there is not.
We must act
within our capacities, to not let the word Justice be taken by people who just
want to apply stereotypes and make little scenes to justify their own
existence.
There is
hope, because people who just get together because they found someone in common
to hate will never have the strength of people who fight to defend who they
love. Also, wicked leaders lie to their followers, which eventually puts them
in trouble.
Truth will
prevail. May God be with you and thanks so much for all the love.
