(Cultured, erudite, and even intelligent people when they talk about arms or weapons, fall into a dark and unfathomable abyss that shows their confusion and even childishness, so I dedicate this post to them with affection)

We see continuous meetings of world leaders, the last being the G20. Now Biden continues the trip to Vietnam to seek alliance against China and Kim in Vladivostok. Let’s see; The purpose of the armed units’ leaders is to subdue others through their ability to destroy them, but they do not talk about it.

For armed units, peace is a ceasefire, a brief state in which the killing ceases and they set about rearming and preventing each other from rearming as much as they can – and war then is usually the prevention of that rearmament.

This state is called peace because it is incorporated together with the mastery of one of these arms, thus denying its threat and purpose of maximum possible damage to the other, which it conceals with verbiage. They talk about justice, human rights, climate change, development, etc. but they look for the greatest possible destruction capacity, which is what later dispenses justice, rights (human or otherwise), funds or financing (the printing of IOUs) for development and everything else, and thus the nuclear powers are officially recognized leaders of the world.

The security document produced by these 20 large arms refers to the fact that no one should invade other countries, however, they are the main producers of arms and since the small armed units are dependent on their production, talking about the independence of the small arms is nonsense, since they depend on the supply of large ones to exist and the usual thing is that rival powers supply weapons to the factions that serve their interests as is the case in Syria, Ukraine or in African countries. The 20 big ones do not need to invade anyone, small arms go to buy supplies from them becoming necessarily dependent. And if the big ones find interest in those territories, they can supply weapons to the rebel faction that best serves them or creates it spending very little, given the need of the people in those countries.

But if we look at the arm as humans without being at its service and abide by the stupidity, brutality and the absence of humanity that it imposes on us (necessary for the exercise of war as cannon fodder), we have full clarity and certainty that peace It is universal inclusivity, well, normal coexistence with others people, to whom we inform and share our purposes, etc. Obviously inclusive decision-making prevents and avoids the purpose of harming (arms, the evil) and only deals with the common good. That is why we convene a Congress of Human Unity that assumes responsibility for common human security, basically disarmament, and ensures that all decisions are inclusive.