As emotional creatures we tend not to think of conflict
etiologically. Quite the contrary, when it comes to bellicosity or
temperamental belligerence the offender is almost always stuck in context; when
trapped within the frame of confrontation we tend to have trouble seeing the
big picture, as evidenced by the scarcity of effectively expunged contentions.
Here, I present an alternative to this merry-go-round of spite.
Strength, by its very nature, is relative. One can only be
strong at the expense of another’s weakness. To be powerful is to be more
powerful than a foe, with no baseline objectivity whatsoever. It is from this precarious
inevitability that conflict arises.
To assert strength is to ensure survival. Yet, the
preponderance of quarrels in today’s world, great or small, yield no
consequence to our wellbeing. All but some are merely egotism, an ancient drive
belied by nuanced curves in our expectation of supremacy… all but wasteful
incontinence, to put it mildly.
The premise: if we can satiate the ego of the two that tango, we will effectively render the mating dance superfluous.
Essentially, all conflict is entrenched in psychological
warfare, or rather, psychodynamic warfare: one ego contesting the next and the
next… until a reigning champion is crowned or everybody perishes, and we know
which comes first.
Alas, it is our prerogative, nay, our duty to sacrifice ego
in the face of adversity. The days of “stand up and fight” are gone, existing
only within those who seek to drag war into perpetuity. Lay down your arms in
the face of conflict, cede your ego and know that war will no longer exist.
Surrender.
Should you be the arbitrator of conflict, ensure that both
sides feel whole and from your aerie watch the conflict dispel into the
nothingness from whence it came.
That this is the simplest idea you have ever heard invigorates my waning faith in humanity.
Some restrictions may apply.
Some restrictions may apply.