War

Since I've finished my exams, I've been catching up on a lot of reading lately, and I've just re-read the book Nonviolence which I had mentioned earlier more in depth. I love the concept of it, how nonviolence actually works and how it can really make a difference. As I was reading it though, there was a passage that really got my attention, especially with all this talk about the TSA. So here it is:

Nuclear weapons did not end warfare, because that would have required political leaders to completely rethink their concept of power. As Hungarian writer Gyorgy Konrad pointed out, the political elite had no alternative concept."They have none because they are professionals of power. Why should they choose values that are in direct opposition to physical force?" And so, faced with nuclear destruction, the goal, rather than ending war, became limiting it.

And then in another section is says:

In October 2002, by a vote of 77 to 23 in the Senate and 296 to 133 in the House of Representatives, the U.S. Congress voted to give President George W. Bush the authority to attack Iraq because it was building "weapons of mass destruction." It is a peculiarly accepted notion that the United States, the only country ruthless enough to ever have used atomic weapons-and used them against a civilian population-should be trusted with a monopoly on weapons of mass destruction. But worse, the claim of Iraqi weapons was a blatant lie contradicted by the United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq, among many other reliable sources.

All wars are accompanied with lies, terrible lies that spread fear and hate in the heart of millions. My question is, how many people see these lies for what they really are, and how many people see them and simply turn a blind eye?

Food for thought....

Non-Violence - Mark Kurlansky

This is by far one of the greatest books I've read in a long time. The way history is plagued with violence is really sickening and this book sheds a light on so many of those incidents, how leader and politicians have used everything in their power from money, charisma, fear, and brutal force to lead people of wars that are deemed to be "just". The way wars are waged under the banner of all that is right and holy is frightening. There is no justification for violence or brutality and no good could come from it. War only leads to more war and more hatred. It is the justifications that are used for these wars that breed hatred in our hearts and in our minds. The thoughts of a common enemy, a common demon, instills our lives with constant fear and loathing that can only be quenched by violence, the destruction of that common demon.

History repeats itself but it must be stopped. I refuse to believe that human kind is by nature evil, immoral and violent. The institutions around us, be it government, society, culture, or religion, that twist the facts and use us to accomplish their selfish goals. It is by practicing this idea of non-violence that violence can be overcome.A dangerous idea it is indeed

I highly recommend this book. Give it a read. You won't regret it.

Pillars of the Earth

I've had this book for a long time and every time I pick it up I can't seem to get into it, then finally one day, for lack of anything else to read, I decided to finish it once and for all.

This is not my typical reading, however, after the first three chapters I started to really get into it. Having never read anything for Follet before, I found his style to be quite simple and easy to read. The descriptions were quite good giving a good visual image and overly complex and boring with details, although some of the architectural descriptions could have been reduced.

The story was quite interesting and the way it all fit together made for quite an exciting novel.The character development could have been better so that as a reader I would connect more with the characters. There was a certain vile sickness to some of the characters which I felt was taken to a certain extreme and was somehow unnecessary. However the way one event led to another in such a smooth manner made the book quite a page turner.

It is unfortunate however that the biggest disappointment was the ending. After spending days depriving myself of sleep to read and find out what happens at the end, I was sorely disappointed. The end seemed to rushed as if Follet just wanted to get it over and done with. It made me feel cheated as the end unraveled and I felt that all that reading was for nothing. It was short and did not satisfy the curiosity that had kept me going for all those pages.

On a scale of 1-10, I'd give it a 6.5. Much more if the ending had been better.