And now the news: “Humankind has lost its LAST gun – politicians laughing!” It was a museum´s piece anyways!
We did not decide, we just lost it, out of carelessness. The last ultimate dramatic helper, the deadly decision-maker, either on stage (Chekhov) or in film (with a girl, Godard) is gone for real, only props and blanks are left!
An utopian idea? A weak moment, full of surreal pacifistic delusion? Maybe.
I try to explain it again in one long sentence (the kind of a description in a German way…German speaking individuals love to build long sentences – just read Kant for recreation…or Thomas Bernhard – to be short and concise is overrated English propaganda):
‘In a comedy-utopia yet to be written, in a world where firearms are forbidden in military use, in a world (largely) at peace, where military means a supporting force in crisis but not “killing somebody for the sake of X or by chance”, where every death is checked and irresponsible action as well as unnecessary violence strongly persecuted, a world, where the last firearm gets sent away more or less thoughtlessly, and maybe lost carelessly forever in the desert, somebody might imagine up a futuristic dialogue of two politicians mocking each other about this and having the lightness and freedom of mind to tell politically incorrect jokes about pregnant women adding to the “grave” matter.’
Well, New Zealand could be the stage for this. New Zealand could be the cradle of the the future. Why, because its all the fault of this fun article you can find @ www.thecivilian.co.nz stating that this actually happened. The last gun in New Zealand, gone. Lost forever, maybe. And now they are defenceless.
The truth? Well, it´s not really like that – as the guards of the New Zealand paradise island still have somewhat 5000 5.56mm IW Steyr rifles, and about 350 Pinzgauer All-Terrain Vehicles (60 of them armoured) both manufactured by my fellow Austrians, as well as mortars, anti-tank missiles, hand grenades, etc….you name it. The editor/author/journalist of the Civilian just decided to take the dispute a step further it seems, creating a metaphor – a very intriguing one.
But, you may ask yourself with me – what if?!
The mentioned Civilian.nz article titled “New Zealand left defenceless as troops take army’s only gun to Iraq” unfortunately seems to be rubbish in facts, but the humanistic wish and the fun other nations make of the weak defences of New Zealand is apparently true. Still: what if we decide to live in such a world and try to make it happen? Imagine no one having an attack or defence force in the conventional sense anymore, starting with New Zealand – or Austria? Who needs to defend the Alps anyways? Too much of 70is hippie-dreaming? Well, those folks with long hear and a soft, human attitude at least managed to stop the Vietnam war (which the government had lost anyways back then, but still…).
The possible consequences in the absence of Smith& Wesson trouble-solving strategies? We would all stop to defend ourselves without crap attitudes from cavemen times and would need other forms of sorting out our disputes. Who felt comfortable with those anguish “I attack first” and “pre-emptive strikes make the world more secure – before something bad happens” anyways? No more “I have the bigger club, you do what I say” politics. This translates roughly into “I have the bigger aircraft-carrier armada, so shut up and stay out of my prospective deep-sea oil fields”. Grunt. Just imagine a different world without falling back to a reflex like:”That cannot work, I am afraid we always have been like that…it is in our nature!” What if its rather our weakness, not our strength and fed only by fear and insecurity? It might be not that complicated dare to stand behind a strong decision and commitment to collective anti-violence – why can`t we decide to make that true? Any guesses? What do you think keeps us from reaching this scenario?
What a wonderful world this would be…
[photo by Zvon Lavric]