Apologies to my housemates - kinda

It has been noted by my housemates that during my week without Xbox I was not completely Xbox-less. I did 'play' Call of Duty 4 - 2 somewhat but since it is described by its designers as a cinematic experience rather than a game I feel I am slightly excused. My housemates would disagree but that would be their problem.

I'd also make apologies about other things but that's not really what I'm going to write about. Today I'm going to write concerning...world peace. Yes, world peace. And why I disagree with it. Not as an ideal, but as a concept.

You really think world peace is achievable in the next hundred years? Think about for it a second; every single nationalistic and patriotic tendency put to rest, every prejudice forgotten and discarded and rivalries and feuds ended for the greater good? Doesn't sound very human, does it?

This is because, at heart, I don't think people want to be at peace. Everyone likes a challenge - those who don't I'm going to generalize into either the category 'liar' or 'afraid of failure', neither of which I accept as a good reason to deny a challenge.

Without challenge, we wouldn't better ourselves - what would be the point? What would we need to improve if there were no challenges? The only life-form that has no real challenges in its existence is plants and trees, and even then I'd argue that a chainsaw might warrant some rather interesting selective evolution on behalf of the Earth's vegetation.

But what about the fuel crisis? Fossil fuel shortage? The O-zone layer? Extinction of other species? The solving of the mysteries of life?

I would say people would be more inclined to find an answer if there was some competitive reward to it - who finds the answer first. And whoever finds that answer, or whichever nation, will then play that advantage against the others, trading extortionately for will become an invaluable and necessary resource. Why have peace when you can be better than someone, right? Or everyone else.

Admittedly, that's not a very nice way to look at humanity but it's historically accurate. Did the U.S. share its discovery of fusion with the world to help deal with power shortages? Did the British Empire share its steam engine designs with the world? Was not gunpowder first traded extortionately before others could find its secret? Did Rome spread civilization peaceably to its neighbouring nations?

No, no, no and no. Because if you have an advantage, you use it. Otherwise it's not really an advantage. I'm pretty sure whoever invented the wheel covered in in canvas or animal skins to hide its secrets from others before letting the cat out of the bag when he died.

People argue that people don't share advantages with everyone because then others will use it against the creators. Shock horror. If, say, Kazakhstan perfected solar power and refused to share the technology with the U.S. or Europe, it would be for just political reasons - admittedly, we'd probably go in and do war until we got it but the those wily Kazaks might tear down the facilities and burn the evidence so we get nothing. They wouldn't share it because they'd fear to have it used against them and I'm pretty sure America would well do in one of its crusades for oil.

As soon as the second monkey found out how to use a club, he killed the first because it was the only other one who knew the secret. The secret of the club was a distinct advantage over other monkeys, and the best monkey got all the food and girl monkeys. So why share if you don't have to?

Yes, I'm judging, Yes, harshly and without a view to religion or other such humane elements of humanity. Doesn't change the fact that in the predominant number of examples I'm, sadly, right.

I'd be upset but since I'm not too bothered about world peace etc right now then I can hardly get too emotionally involved. I'm not bothered because right now in my house there's no hot water and a host of other more immediately applicable, albeit selfish, concerns.

But if I didn't care about me, I wouldn't be human right? No, I don't think I'm better or more deserving than other people. I just can't help them right now and going to the trouble of finding a way to do so would mean I'd compromise my position in a capitalist society built around the one and self-service. Sad but true. I'd hate the world but lucky for me I'm in quite a good position to cogitate on these things - and if you cared about personally saving the world you wouldn't be reading internet blogs when you're bored, would you, Adrian?

Your name's probably not Adrian but it was worth a shot for the chance someone named Adrian might fall off their desk chair in shock and then go change the world for the better. See, I'm doing my part; are you?