---- Original Message ----- From: To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: 11/2/2005 11:51:14 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: War and Panic In a message dated 11/2/2005 4:45:13 P.M. Central Standard Time, andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx writes: It is absurd to use the word peace to describe a situation where one side destroys the other Hi I'm not sure we'll ever have peace if this is the definition of the word. We must eliminate peace. Even diplomacy, then, is 'war', right? Sanctions destroy one side (often) by hurting the civilian world of a nation-state. (as though anyone in authority really cares <wry look>) So--if we could just do what Andy often says and face the fact that we'll never have peace, there will always be conflict--then we might actually get somewhere with living in settings which resemble that of a peaceful place. They would not be 'peaceful', though, as that is now not a helpful word. If the warmongers could just understand that peace really means war since one side is one-up-ing the other..life would be not peaceful...and healthy. A.A. I appreciate the sentiment. Humanity is so warped that even peace is warlike. Thousands of years and 6 billion humans later, nothing has changed except to get worse. Changing the vocabulary may help to the extent that it names the real demon, which is that war starts in the gut, in the salivary glands. War is soaked up in mother's milk. Avoiding it is like not scratching an itch. How does one not scratch an itch? Certainly the intellect is useless for avoiding conflict. The intellect is another one of God's jokes. Just the way he created youth and wasted it on the young, he created intellect and wasted it on humans. Had he given intellect to creatures like, say, cows, who are not inherently warlike, maybe they'd be traveling between the stars by now instead of wasting their energy killing each other and the very planet they live on. Andy Best, Marlena Best, Marlena in Missouri