• soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    And what you consider local is the countries you consider yourself belonging to, i.e., the west, ⟳ .
    If you’re a separatist from southern France you can say “who cares about what’s happening in the rest of France ?”, there’s no need for anguish in your voice. Yet when the twin towers fell, or something similar, french people could say “there’s been a bombing there” with as much anguish as it happened in France, i think that you’re omitting the term “anguish” too much in this conversation.

    For example, you wouldn’t say « There’s been a bombing in the Middle-East ! », because we(sterners) would say « Yeah. And ? », that was the whole purpose of this thread, yet you focused on the omission of the location.

    • macniel@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dude of course local means local to me and with that I mean my town/city in my country on the continent I live on. Not the West or the East or the North or South. That’s a pretty limiting world view you have.

      • soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Interesting, so criticising our tribalism makes me the one with a limited world view, how so ?

        We care much more about what’s happening in countries we’re allied with(, whether they’re on our continent or not), that sucks, we should help each other and not fight [insert a way too long list of countries here…]

        It’s not that world peace is difficult, but that our refusal of unity is difficult to overturn, we(sterners) are the f*cking prime wagers of death&destruction, didn’t know that ten years ago.

        • irmoz@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          so criticising our tribalism makes me the one with a limited world view, how so ?

          No, you fucking invalid. Your worldview is limited because you don’t understand what “local” means.

        • macniel@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          i mean, we are tribal yeah. we care about ourself first, then our family and allies then the rest. Thats simply how organised life works.

          You cant possibly care for EVERYONE at the same capacity. I mean you could but then you would be having mental breakdowns all the time and despair.

          Its about self-preservation. And if you deny that to yourself… well, good luck in the real world out there, you will need it.

          • soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Thanks, because that’s how we should behave, not only towards humans but non-humans as well(, and it’s easier to care about humans as a whole once you care about non-humans b.t.w.).

            • macniel@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              , and it’s easier to care about humans as a whole once you care about non-humans b.t.w.).

              citation needed

              • soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                What i meant in my previous comment didn’t took into account the propaganda about other humans being evil, the logic was that once you refuse to kill a non-human it’s easier to refuse killing a human, and once you have non-humans it’s easier to accept the thought of having human slaves.
                And it has to be sincere, i believe non-humans to be better than us, in enough ways for me to sincerely admire them.
                But we may indeed still hate other humans because they’re evil and we’re liberating their population, or ourselves, yet every conflict could have been avoided if both sides agreed to unite in diversity, i don’t see an exception to this rule. And we’re still nowadays attributing the roles of good//evil instead of seeking solutions to please both sides(, usually because the strongest side, very often the west, refuses to change or make concessions).
                It’s not that world peace is difficult, but that our refusal of unity is difficult to overturn, we(sterners) are the f*cking prime wagers of death&destruction, didn’t know that ten years ago.

                • macniel@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s not that world peace is difficult,

                  It absolutely is. The Human factor is too insurmountable.

                  • soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    That’s a topic i love and i don’t often have the possibility to see someone not thinking it is possible(, i’ve never met someone arguing that it is not desirable).
                    If you pointed at our arrogant/selfish desire to be “on top” of the other, then my answer would be to explain why everyone would gain and be more powerful if we’re united, and it must be lonely at the top, with only one culture, if we have friendly countries who are really different in many domains then it’s better to be friends with equals, we have to think of infallible measures against treason but that’s not impossible.

      • soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        And your answer wasn’t a counter-argument

        But in the end, if i’m the only one finding this sentence interesting then there’s no point in discussing it, i’ve lost interest in it as well.

        Just that it shouldn’t feel more normal when we’re bombing than when we’re being bombed, i guess that’s ~all i aimed to point out, yet we’re only surprised when we’re on the receiving end, nothing new.