No doubt people mean well when they say, ‘violence is never the answer', but it seems like that statement is a blatant lie. Violence is often the answer and it has solved a great deal of problems in the past.
The Romans didn't come to take over half of Europe, some of Asia, and even some of Africa with diplomacy alone. While there were skilled Roman diplomats, there were many more skilled warriors. Using advanced tactics and technology, the Romans overcame tribe after tribe and civilisation after civilisation. It made it easy for their ideas to prevail when there’s was no one else to have an idea.
But—and it's a big but—the Romans aren't around today for a reason. The Germanic tribes were also skilled combatants. After a string of incompetent leaders, Rome was facing an enemy it couldn't defeat. In the end, the Roman violence was outmatched by that of the Goths and Saxons.
For centuries, violence solved a great deal of problems for the Romans. And then, in the 5th century C.E. violence solved an enormous problem for the Germanic tribes when they conquered Rome. Therefore, it's a reasonable conclusion to draw; violence does solve problems. However, the answer it provides is one marbled with pain for all involved and it proves unsustainable.
If the solution of violence is short-lived, and the victims of that violence are forced to endure pain, then this solution is not only temporary, but unjust. To adopt violence as a solution means foregoing ethical obligations and actively perpetuating trauma.
The obvious alternative to violence is diplomacy, and it has a long history of success. While Greece isn't the nation it once was, it's still here. In part, it's here because of their diplomatic insights when addressing none other than the Romans.
I've never needed to resort to violence to solve my problems before, and I hope my diplomatic abilities serve me well enough that I never need to. It's a hollow existence when the many beautiful things which lack brute force are destroyed I consider violence to be an answer, but it's not a lasting one.
The Examined Life
by Rhys Hagan
‘The unexamined life isn't worth living.'
To live without examining life is to live without purpose.
The impact of this statement is lost on those who aren't entirely sure what it is to examine a life. For too long, and too often, have I fallen into that category. Doing things because it's what I've always done, saying things without considering the consequences, not saying things because it's not my problem.
I won't say that the idea of 'The Examined Life' is to find my purpose and live more completely, that's simply not true. The reason I'm writing this is to express my existential angst. To discuss the possibility that, perhaps, life has no satisfying purpose.
I plan on asking difficult questions which may not have an answer and addressing sensitive topics like sex and suicide. I'll touch on the multitude of wild things that go through my head but I find difficult to express through conversation. Or things that people just don't want to talk about because it makes them uncomfortable.
Hopefully, I can offer some kind of insight.
Hopefully, I can find some.