Discussion»Statements»Rosie's Corner» Is it always warmongers who perceive people/groups as THE ENEMY and peacemakers who see such people as the REAL ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE?
I’d say not. Divisiveness and warmongering are different points on a wide scale. Identifying “our [human] enemies” is subjective, and a natural function of our psyches, but it defies the definition of being a peacemaker.
The divisive was exacerbated the moment the oath of office was administered January 2017. It is hate-based and race-based. So you are saying that peacemakers do not identify an enemy or an obstacle to peace? I am going to have to digest that. I think that Gandhi and MLK jr absolutely identified the enemy and took precautions based on that. So we disagree. No worries. Thank you for your reply DB.
This post was edited by RosieG at August 26, 2018 7:54 AM MDT
What I said was it defies the definition of peacemaking. It is, however, essential to know who it is we need to make peace with. In making peace, wouldn’t the general goal be to stop being enemies?
I think we could play some semantics with words like “opposition” and ”foes”, but aren’t they all in essence just parties who disagree?
”Enemy” entails the notion of hatred, I’d submit not always an accurate or productive way to describe an impasse short of violent conflict, wouldn’t you say?
This post was edited by Don Barzini at August 27, 2018 3:00 AM MDT
Semantics is always the elephant in the room DB when people try to exchange ideas. Words mean different things to different people. The donjohn is the one who brought up "enemy of the people" not I. He says it's the media. He lies. Having a difference of opinion is how we learn. If we only talk to those who see things as we do what is there to learn? Civil disagreement is fine. Sometimes we can disagree cordially too. That's even better. Some folks perceive "the other" as "THE ENEMY". What "the other" represents to them varies. Fear is involved of course. I think fear is the cause of hate but what do I know? The ability to exchange ideas is essential I think to any society. In the olden days when Ronald Reagan (Republican) and Tip O'Neal (Dem) were on opposite sides of the political divide they'd socialize after hours. Today? No way. If a Republican is caught being nice to a Dem that's it. They're out. They're dead to their colleagues. That is why compromise and cooperation no longer exists in politics. I think that is another evil foisted upon we the people by the donjohn or at least intensified. There is agreeable disagreement and hateful hostile belligerent dangerous disagreement. With donjohn and his supporters I see no agreeable anywhere except among themselves. Thank you for your reply! :)
Who talks in terms of "the people"? As though "the people" were some kind of exclusive and all-knowing privileged group who were somehow privy to "the truth" and all walked alike and talked alike and had just the same values and ideas. And anyone not in your group must not be a "person". The people is everybody, not just those who think or act like you would have them do. We are all "people simply because of our humanness and subject to our own wiles and with our own lives to lead. And just who is "the enemy" of "the people"? Why the people themselves! They are their own enemy!
Don Barzini 