Conflict elimination is a fantasy, conflict mitigation is reality

Conflict will always arise between disparate ethnic, religious, and philosophical groups. In order for the species to continue to exist in relative peace and to further our own goals we look for ways to reduce or mitigate conflict between ourselves and out groups.

The majority of what are called globalists seek to reduce conflict through homogenization, centralization, and integration of disparate heterogeneous groups. To make us docile and cooperative. This method is fundamentally flawed without attempting to change or modify human behaviour. Even with this attempt to change or create a so called “Ubermensch” or a person beyond human nature, it fails and has failed in practice. You cannot simply erase what or who a human being is. Even given time, genocide, and propaganda differences will remain and have remained.

The USSR attempted this with their invasions of eastern European countries. They erased who they were, destroyed their ethnic identities, destroyed their literary, artistic, and philosophical works, and forced them to speak Russian, “think Russian”, etc in order to create what they called “the new soviet man” or homo sovieticus. They slaughtered anyone who opposed this and wiped out ethnic groups they didn’t think they could control in this way. This is irrefutable. This is the underlying pre-supposition of communism, that yes human beings are not capable of doing better and eliminating conflict therefore they must be adapted to do so, they must be changed through any means necessary.

As we all know this failed spectacularly because it attempted to reshape man, which is simply not possible in the long term. Conflict and identity are as natural as emotion to human beings regardless of how good your propaganda and ability to mass murder is.

So that begets the question, if globalism will obviously fail just as the soviets did what is the only reasonable alternative and what are the enemies to this alternative? Said another way, what is the chief enemy of conflict mitigation and what can help facilitate conflict mitigation?

Simply put, integration is the enemy and more specifically forced integration is the primary enemy of conflict mitigation and the better alternative? Segregation and separation. The civil rights movement was a disaster for this country, one can’t help but imagine how much more peaceful the world would be if we had simply carved off a section of the United States for minorities and let them chart their own destiny and if communism simply did not exist. It’s also completely unsurprising that the soviets helped fund and grow the civil rights movement in the United States.

The common counter to this argument is that all we need is “power.” I can’t help but find myself chuckle a little when i’ve read or heard this. Power is only necessary when conflict arises, therefore power in conflict is downstream of separation which mitigates conflict. This is basic logic. Without conflict power loses its position, without mass conflict, mass power is unneeded.

For this reason, we should be promoting separation and decentralization at every strata and sub strata of human relations, along whatever line is necessary. Hate should be encouraged toward the ends of separation not conflict and power. This, again, is not saying power is irrelevant, it is wholly necessary in a environment consumed with conflict but it is not our solution. It is merely a means of defense.