Who Needs the Pen to Be Mightier than the Sword

Its in the common interest to create a society where "the pen is mightier that the sword" if only because the pen is less dangerous that the sword and mistakes with a pen are easier to fix than those committed with a sword. The first attempt at political organization probably stemmed from two lines of historical experience that have proven beneficial if not crucial for the survival of humanity: family and tribal loyalty on one hand, and the importance of preserving preferred hereditary traits leading to more productive crops and domesticated animals. The logic consequences of these line of thinking was the absolutist hereditary monarchy which failed in the long term after numerous obstinate attempts to make it work. The first attempts at democracy the most well-known in Ancient Greece were not very impressive too: they managed to kill Socrates and loose their freedom to a dictator - Alexander and later to Imperial Rome.

Only the unique combination of Enlightenment in Western Europe (brought in part by Arabic and Muslim cultural influences both original and through their acting as an intermediary for the penetration in Europe of Ancient Indian and Chinese culture and their role for the preservation of Ancient Greek and Roman sources), combined with the advances in trade and industry brought to the initially fledgeling democracies of Switzerland and the North of Europe to culminate with the creation of the U.S.A.

The problems is that even after the end of the cold war and a seeming worldwide consensus on the fact that their is no alternative to liberal democracy and market economy as the only political and economic guarantees for aligning the interests of the individuals to create viable political and economic entities, too many of the countries whose governments proclaim adherence to the above principles (often under some international pressure) in reality develop corrupt states, harboring organized crime and terrorists and stiffing economic development while covertly or overtly abusing the human rights of their hapless citizens.

It cannot be that the citizens of these failed or failing states want this. It is against their interests. I cannot be that the people of the developed countries want them to suffer too if not so much for reasons of sympathy and compassion but more realistically because of the danger that oppression and crime in one country can easily spill over the world through mafia activities, terrorism and the actions of the corrupt state causing suffering and death regardless of borders, cultural preferences and political allegiance.

From a political point of view the easiest way to deal with one's interests may be to take care of everything on your own. Retire in the mountains, fish and hunt for dinner and forget about the rest of the world. That may be a boring but feasible and with some luck sustainable existence. The security, freedom and opportunities of civilization come with complications and danger of becoming a slave of nonessential desires and activities. But it's the only prudent way.

Proper institutions may help but ultimately its everyone's responsibility to take pursue personal goals. The care of others though gives the power and ability to pursue these goals more efficiently and effectively while mainlining a level of security and freedom impossible individually. Freedom as understood by Roosevelt in his four freedoms: "freedom from want, freedom from fear, freedom of faith and freedom of expression".

Personal Interests, Politics and Philosophy

Personal interests are our only legitimate claim we have to resources including the time and effort of others. I believe we can only inquire about other’s interests to be able to find ways to align ours to theirs and help each other achieve our goals through cooperation. Free association through discussion and good all fashioned haggling about who gets what should complete the process to everyone’s satisfaction.
Unfortunately human history is littered with wars and injustice and despite the major advances in science and technology that ensure that al humanity’s needs can be met at an acceptable level to situation in politics prevents that from happening. On the contrary we the people continue to waste resources for expensive and destructive armaments, disregard the environment which affects us and our offspring and worst of all: do nothing to relief the suffering of fellow human beings who are in dire conditions through no fault of their own or even worse killing, oppressing or denying opportunities for development.
That is even more perplexing because if you check the statements of our politicians and the declarations of the only global political body we have, regardless of its deficiencies the UN we all want peace, prosperity, care for the environment and sustainable development.
There is an explanation for that discrepancy between intention and reality and I will not accuse politicians of hypocrisy but the sheer complexity of balancing all interests, the complexity of ensuring proper governance of resources and the ingrained ancient and ineffective in the modern age concerns about security prevent the right things from being done.
Corrupt politicians and business leaders will exist always. Good, bad and completely rotten people will exist always. That’s human nature and I have no explanation for that. But the least we can do is eliminate groundless fear that stems from ignorance or reluctance to abolish defunct systems, knowledge and beliefs that worked before but are no longer relevant. It’s easy to find excuses for inaction but I believe that if we realize that it’s our own lives, our own welfare that we are playing with we’ll be more keen to take matters in our own hands and think more, listen more, learn more and act more sensibly in our own interests which ultimately is in everyone else’s interest.