The political elites of our planet have always been accustomed to claiming justice, and they strongly encourage their people to participate in the great struggle to eradicate evil-because evil will eventually be defeated by justice. Indeed, the reason is not that evil is born short of justice, but that the label of evil is always attached to those who are defeated. The Nazis were evil, but they said their war was a holy war of the highest order. The Allies were righteous, but they fought only when their interests were compromised. The battle between good and evil is often staged, but it always occurs between two countries that each claim to be "just". This is a bit embarrassing. Since everyone is a messenger of justice, sitting down and chatting all day and having a meal to relax, won't the problem be solved? Do you need to break your head and bleed to death? The reasonable explanation is: everyone is not a good bird, so everyone can be labeled as "evil". The so-called "messenger of justice" is nothing more than the gold that the initiator of the war put on his face, just to make a big name. Using decent language to cover up filthy purposes is called "familiarity". It can not only win the sympathy of the public, but also fool the soldiers into working for you. It is really cheap and tried-and-true.
In fact, regardless of the twists and turns of righteousness and evil, let's just look at one thing: what are the benefits of fighting, and who can benefit from it? Because of competing for benefits, one "evil" Nazi fell; because of competing for benefits, thousands of "evil" Nazis stood up again, attacking each other, and fighting each other. A little benefit, let the infinite justice leak, it's a mess, you sing and I will appear. But then again, every family has hard-to-read scriptures, and we don’t have to be too demanding of political elites. After all, a large group of outstanding employees from domestic banks, arms dealers, energy companies, and multinational companies are eager to cook a meal. Woolen cloth. Even if you don't rely on your charity, it is a very meaningful thing to grab something from someone else's house. How do you say it? It's better to make a dime every day if you have thousands of dollars in your family. Besides, the bulls who punished Zang Fu have already been blown out, and voters are staring at the show, how can they be so embarrassed to talk and not practice?
War, war never changes. This classic game line expresses the greed of human nature and the ferocity of politics in extremely simple language. To wage war in the name of justice is an upgraded version of political struggle and a common tactic. No matter how beautiful the slogans of democracy and justice are, they cannot hide the blood of looting and competition. Otherwise, "a thousand horses in a car, a thousand cars in leather, a hundred thousand in armor, and food for a thousand miles", you say that you have come all the way to safeguard justice and spread democracy, I say either you have enough to eat, or I'm full and stupid. The so-called victory of justice over evil only exists in the cartoons watched by children. The competition for interests is the code of war in the real world, and no matter who gets the title of "justice" and "evil", this is also a political phenomenon. The source of complexity. As long as international relations continue to be in a state of anarchy, the war will continue forever, and the myth of justice against evil will also have a long history and continue to deceive the people of the world.
From this point of view, the phrase "there is no eternal justice, only eternal interests" can also serve as a wise saying. In order to obtain benefits, the means of violence are indispensable, but the infinite pursuit of war violence may make the war fundamentally out of control, resulting in the serious consequences of destroying the opponent and also being destroyed by the opponent by the same means. Unfortunately, the emergence of nuclear weapons has turned this potential possibility into reality. Since 1945, wars between countries around the world have become more cautious. Everyone is afraid that a single move will attract a lot of people, so try to be gentle and restrained. Avoid head-on conflict with nuclear-armed countries, and at the most let some small valet agents who are not afraid of death charge into battle, and wars seem to be less cruel than they used to be. However, the root cause of nuclear terror still exists, and the threat of nuclear war has not disappeared. Although the possibility is very small, there is no guarantee that one day the war madman will obtain nuclear weapons, or the political elites of various countries will lose their minds in anger and press the wrong button while busy. Nuclear button, then the horn of world destruction will sound. The national disputes in the movie are caused by "nuclear" and finally ended because of "nuclear", which expresses such a concern. Although its expression is very funny and humorous, how can the political struggle in the real world be any better? Where to go?
View more about Iron Sky reviews
