should be punished for killing unarmed people for any reason, there is no doubt that. The movie "King of War" is based on this logic to develop its anti-war stance in order to get the audience's resonance. The killings that frequently occur on the African continent in the film are aimed at unarmed people. It seems unreasonable and chilling.
It may be human instinct to try to destroy the enemy physically. More civilized people know that if this primitive impulse is allowed to spread, everyone will face a huge cost, especially for civilized people, so people invented the concept of human rights, that is, you cannot easily deprive others of the right to survive. what. Africa in the film obviously does not belong to such a society. There, guns are flooded, and the killing is unlimited. You have the right? Your rights are not worth a bullet worth 1 cent.
I really hope that Africa in reality will not be like this. With the end of the Cold War, things should be better, right? Some classmates also went to Africa on business trips, at least they came back without missing arms or legs. The situation there should be going well now, right?
Annihilation and being annihilated happen every day around us, there is no way to escape. Netscape has long been wiped out, and recently there is a harbor. Elimination is not right or wrong, it is just a reality. Those who are eliminated should not blame others. You can only blame yourself for not being strong enough, and the reasons for not being strong enough can't escape the following reasons: not knowing the world, not having enough means, not being ruthless enough, or being confused, slack, or messing up. ,Etc., etc. Recently, "wolf" sex is more popular, and "bright sword" is popular. In fact, it is the technology of popular elimination and anti-elimination. Therefore, elimination is not only not far from our daily life, but also very popular. In the words of Taoism, elimination is the law of nature since the formation of heaven and earth, and it should be in accordance with the principles of heaven and nature. There is nothing wrong with that.
What's wrong is slaughter. The characteristic of the massacre is to regard the other party's human rights as nothing, and make the other party defenseless. It is so unreasonable and self-willed. If you are robbed or snatched, you will be killed, regardless of whether you want it or not, and you will not even be given a chance to speak.
Is the massacre far from us? Not far. Africa is the Ming Tu, and we are the Dark Tu, there is no essential difference.
Born in Africa, it is of course impossible to play in New York, and of course it is impossible to rush into someone's house with a gun while in New York and ask them to take money from their wallet. The slaughter around us is quite civilized and quite subtle. The Enron case, false accounting, and stock market manipulation are the massacres of stockholders; high house prices are massacres of urban residents; low land prices are massacres of villagers in the countryside; the problem discovered by the Audit Office is the massacre of state property; illegal pollution discharge It is a slaughter of nature; and the modern buildings appearing next to the Yellow River Hukou are the slaughter of the Hukou; their characteristics are that they regard the human rights of the other side as nothing, and face an unarmed opponent, which can be willful.
These people have the spirit of contemporary warlords. Although it is not a horrible face, he is bold in his heart. What are you afraid of? In the ambiguous bar late at night, they are at ease. The civilians also seem to have a better situation than refugees in Africa, at least they still have food and clothing, and there is a silver lining: the state will take care of it.
So the task of our country is getting heavier and heavier. To be honest, it is not easy in the current country. All warlords are not fuel-efficient lamps. The progress in securities, affordable housing, strict land compensation, annual audit reports, environmental storms, and social security in recent years shows that the country still has ideas and methods. On the one hand, the civilians enjoy the care of the state, and on the other hand, they are also cooperating with the state and fighting warlords on the Internet. This is our approach.
What about the Americans? Hope that the Democratic and Republican parties are wise enough? No, I'm afraid that they will inevitably get along with the warlords by taking other people's hands short. Relying on the media for justice? Even the so-called great New York Times reporters bowed their heads for national security reasons, let alone other things. what to do? The Americans seem to be fine. They never seem to know that there is the word "cynicism". It seems that under the protection of the "Declaration of Human Rights", they can always find something to engage in and be active forever. You can lie down on the lawn in front of the White House at the worst, right? For example, they have begun to oppose Bush's messing around in the name of "national security." Recently, it seems that they have begun to pursue Bush's illegal wiretapping.
The civilians are unarmed, and apart from relying on their own country and leaders, they can only rely on their own mouths. But the Americans don't seem to be cold with their leaders. Perhaps this is the consequence of the four-year change. Then they can only rely on their own mouth. Can this mouth work? So the Americans gave some organizational guarantees: various non-governmental organizations, and a vote. Various non-governmental organizations, such as the National Firearms Association and labor unions, may indeed be controlled by gangs, ill-conceived people, and even hostile groups such as bases, but at least on the surface they still have to serve their declared goals. The vote is so small that it is ridiculed, but at least in the election year, the parliamentarians who colluded with the warlords did not dare to make too much noise in the snowy public opinion letters, and they had to pretend to care. In this way, the massacre will be lessened.
Why do Americans care about human rights? Because you don't care, who cares? Human rights are for unarmed people. Unarmed people have no money to buy arms, what right do they have? Ha ha, there are only human rights. The Americans wear the big hat of national security to pursue Bush’s illegal eavesdropping because they know that the indulgence of power under any reason will bring boundless shady. For example, in the movie Nicholas Cage, although he violated countless criminal laws, he was finally caught. Not guilty; because they know that for any reason, even in the name of "national security", contempt and violation of the Constitution, laws and basic human rights, even just listening to your call, and the massacre on the African continent There is no difference in nature, they are all trampling on human rights; and because they know that trampling like this will only lead to more unscrupulous evil at the root, more security, more Guantanamo, and even Angola.
Why is the United States under the leadership of so many Huahua leaders (such as Clinton) and has done so many bad things (such as North Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq), but it still shows no signs of decline? Perhaps it stems from their people's non-"cynicism". And we depend more on our country. But who knows, we are not lying to ourselves?
View more about Lord of War reviews
