An ambience of violence?

There seems to be some preponderance of violent events in the Philippines and in the world in the past few weeks. The Marawi war against terrorists, the Resorts World shooting and burning, the Baghdad bombing, and the continuing war in Syria and Afghanistan are just some of the violence coming out in the main and social media. London, Paris, and some U.S. cities have also been rocked by violent crimes and the deaths in the riots/demonstrations in Venezuela are rising. Then there is North Korea threatening violence on South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. with missiles with nuclear warheads. And China is threatening our President DU30 with war if we insist on ownership of our portion of the South China Sea.

Are we in violent times? And will these be the times we are headed for a long time? That is the question.

History is full of violent events, in fact the violent events are what are mostly recorded in history because it is usually the turning point or the reckoning point of major changes in mankind’s progress or retrogress. The role of media is an integral part of an event and there are even arguments that media coverage sometimes makes the event happen or happen in a certain way. These are valid observations and it becomes more relevant now with the advances in information and communication technologies. As the world gets more digitally connected, we actually get instant awareness of events while it happens or right after it happens; and in our smart phones at that. The advantage of this is that it forewarns us of the danger and allows us to seek protection if it will affect us. On the other hand, if the violence is far from us, the awareness desensitizes us and we just accept it with resignation.

Part of my childhood was in the province in a milieu of farmers, hunters, and fishers. Guns and bladed weapons were part of our environment. And during election times in the late 1950s and early 1960s all kind of armaments were owned and held by the different political factions. Then, there was also the gun-making cottage industry in our town, so most of us children knew how to handle guns at an early age. But surprisingly most of us led normal lives playing the children’s games in season in those times. Everyone seems to have understood that the weapons were for hunting and for self-protection. There was no environment of violence, and I remember them as some of the more peaceful times in my life. It is not the weapons that make for violent times, it is the people; the weapons are just the instruments. The words and actions of people, particularly people of influence can create the atmosphere of violence. Governments and government officials promote and enhance violence by their rhetoric and governance because the governed are passive and react only after a long time. Most wars are really instigated by a minority sector of society and the majority just went along. In the beginning of WWII there were really very Nazis in Germany.

Let me end this column with selected lines from a poem: “If a child lives with hostility, he learns to fight. If a child lives with fairness, he learns justice. If a child lives with security, he learns to have faith. If a child lives with friendship, he learns to love.”

So, who ordered the ambience?