Mereja.Forum

[Naga Tuma]

I have been asking myself a simple question for a while now. I have a faint memory of what started the question in my mind. I had been hearing news that relate to European history of the last century. I clearly remember asking a simple question about how prosperous Germany could be today if it didn't have to endure the colossal stain of Adolf Hitler. In the news I was hearing, a realization came across that some brainy people who came to the U.S. fled Germany, which is now one of the European countries that are excluded from the five-eye countries.

Then I remembered a YouTube video that I came across a while back about Nazi soldiers running in a countryside in Europe after allegedly taking a drug that would make them awake longer. Before watching it even for a few minutes, a simple question came across about how fallacious the human brain can become. As I watched the soldiers running in the countryside, I saw dispersions of Germans in Europe. Dispersion means lower density. By a simple logic, Germans in Germany would be denser than Germans across the continent of Europe. So, I concluded they did not understand the deterrent effect of natural geography against human efforts at selectively enhancing human performance in order to make soldiers stay awake longer. The Greek mathematician and engineer Archimedes discovered density in an ancient time and Hitler didn't understand the dispersion of his soldiers Europe's countryside in the 20th century.

Later in the YouTube video, I heard that the new drug used by Hitler's soldiers fell in the hands of British officers. That part really made me giggle on top of the inverse relationship between density and dispersion that came to mind after starting to watch the video. Hitler may have boasted the ingenuities of some brains out of Germany that woke up earlier than others, especially in brining reason to the front and leaving dogma to the back. However, just because somebody woke up and saw sunlight earlier than others for a day doesn't mean that the sun rose for only one on that day or forever.

Then, I imagined how it could have conquered the world nobly by focusing on taking its Volkswagens to every corner of the world and solving transportation problems all across the world and deepening its pockets for even more prosperity. The Volkswagen beetle car is the first car I ever got in at a young age, enthusiastically, in a countryside in Ethiopia. Then again, just a few days ago, I saw a car that stood out behind me on a freeway in California because of some slick lighting on its front bumper. It was an inviting scene that drew a much curious attention. It took me moments to see the VW logo in the middle of the slick lighting on the bumper. That realization really made me smile because it felt as if somebody read my mind about taking Volkswagen to different corners of the world with class.

It is this kind of simple observations that led me to ask a simple question: Is it the potential of construction or the propensity for destruction of the human species that is stronger. I do not know if this simple question has been explicitly asked before and if a conclusive answer has been given.

There are plenty of exhibits for this simple question. I started counting those that I heard or read about starting locally from Aksum Hawult to the Pyramid of Giza to the Temple of Solomon to the City of Babylon to the Greek Pantheon to the Roman Coliseum to American democracy. I am sure there are plenty of exhibits on the eastern side of our planet as well that I have yet to hear and read about.

I have been thinking that landmarks or ideas are reflective of both the potential of construction and propensity for destruction of the human species on our good planet Earth. Now, I find not the time it took to build these landmarks, but the time it took to replicate or not replicate one of them. Take the Coliseum for example. Why is it that another one, if not tens of them, hasn't been added since the construction of the first one? The same question can be asked about the many other landmarks with the City of Babylon being a potential exception because many more and bigger cities have been built over the years.

Intuitively, it feels obvious that the propensity for destruction of the human species is strong even if it can't be concluded that it is stronger than its potential for construction. People have died around the world to validate democracy. In 2021 in the U.S., some people rose to invalidate democracy. A bull in Ronald Reagan's shining city on a hill is a case in point for the propensity for destruction.

Statesmen and Stateswomen rise against destructions. If that is the case, can it be said that these landmarks failed to produce enough Statesmen and Stateswomen that would protect them or that the propensities from without overpowered them?

So, how could this happen on our good planet Earth?

[ethiopianunity]

Naga Tuma,

Lost in translation, such discussion is latin to ER members. That being said, did you hear about the Stone Henges installed in Georgia, set up by elites in U.S that said the World will have only 5millions and the rest will be depopulated? That was destroyed yesterday! Do you think it is right or wrong?