Site Navigation 
Listen to this articleThe Arc of Insanity
War represents human behavior at its absolute cruelest depth. It reflects the human condition at its absolute worst and lowest point. The weapons of today are a far cry from the weapons of the ancient past when bows, arrows, spears, swords, and so forth, were the implements used to wage war. 
Fast forward to 2018: Contemporary human weapons technology has evolved or morphed into something much more ferocious and sinister in the form of nuclear, chemical, biological, and radiological weapons of mass destruction not to mention weapons that can fire a million rounds a minute, laser weapons, drone weapons, microwave weapons, and so forth. 
There is even talk of introducing nano weapons into the war environment. What will this weaponry madness ultimately lead to? Will this weaponry madness one day spiral out of control and lead to human extinction?
Contrast the weapons of today and the distances that they can travel with the weapons of ancient human history. The contrast could not be more stark and starling. The manufacture and proliferation of ever more powerful and lethal weapons on Earth is madness plain and simple. It is the arc of insanity.
A weaponized mentality has taken hold in the USA. Regardless of profession or social status, residents in the USA are socialized to not imagine and to not even contemplate the notion of a world without weapons. In the USA, the ability to possess firearms is viewed as birthright enshrined in the USA Constitution. Residents in the USA are socialized to think that owning weapons is as basic, normal, and natural as, say, eating breakfast. This deep-seated, firearm-ownership mind-set among the USA populace is most difficult to overcome. To be sure, this USA firearm-possession mind-set seems to grow stronger and it seems to become even more entrenched with the passage of time.
It is downright stupefying the direction that humans globally are headed in their continual pursuit of more and more guns and bombs.
Facts and Figures
By clicking the "Facts and Figures" buttons above, the underlying graphics depict the countries which are the ringleaders in producing and perpetrating the spread or export of weapons across Earth. These graphics also depict the principal clients or countries importing and stockpiling these weapons.
The Problem: Weapons + Hatred (and Jealousy and Greed) = Killings
The following distance map provides a somewhat rudimentary way to gauge how far missiles—or anything—can travel from one place to another place on Earth. The map allows you to visualize your proximity to being struck by a nuclear missile. Of course, missiles can be deployed by air (for instance, from an aircraft), land (for instance, from a missile silo or truck), and water (for instance, from a ship or submarine). In many respects, there is nowhere to run and nowhere to hide when it comes to a nuclear strike.
On the following map (after clicking the button immediately below), use the blue dot to draw a line from one place to another place. Double click the mouse to complete the distance measurement. Input the kilometers value in the kilometers field to obtain the equivalent distance in miles. According to wikipedia.org, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) are capable of traveling anywhere from a minimum of 5,500 kilometers or about 3,400 equivalent miles to a maximum of 16,000 kilometers or about 9,900 equivalent miles.
If the prevalence of bombs and wars on a global scale are not good things for human survival, then the prevalence of firearms and gun violence on a local scale equally are not good things for realizing a high quality of daily human life. The current situation is akin to bombs and guns gone haywire. Planet Earth has become awash in weapons.
The Consequences: Human Extinction
Scientists have surmised that an all-out nuclear exchange on Earth most likely will result in human extinction and the end of life of Earth in its current form. Looking back at past extinctions on Earth, a general consensus among scientists is that perhaps an act of Mother Nature, namely, an asteroid strike, led to the demise or extinction of the dinosaurs. The demise of the dinosaurs, in turn, paved the way for the rise of the mammals including the emergence of the human species. In contrast to past mass extinctions on Earth which were induced by acts of Mother Nature, humans stand poised to induce their own extinction. If humans should become extinct one day as a result of their unwise actions, for example, a nuclear war, then perhaps hundreds of thousands of years later, new species of life will emerge on Earth to replace humans. Earth and its many life forms are delicate, but life on Earth has proven to be quite resilient at reconstituting itself into something new.
The unrelenting gun violence and mass shootings in the USA seem to dispel the notion that more firearms make for a safer world, not to mention the ongoing (namely, cartel-related and gang-related) gun violence in the USA's backyard, which is known as Latin America. More firearms in the hands of more humans only seem to lead to more incidences of firearm-related violence, injuries, and killings.
Does anyone seriously think that the world has been made safer by North Korea acquiring nuclear weapons? Take a look at the residents of South Korea and Japan. You will notice that the residents of South Korea and Japan are not exactly running into the streets with New Year's Eve-like jubilation, merriment, joy, and glee to celebrate North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons. Given the ongoing religious differences, bickering, and proxy skirmishes between Iran and Saudi Arabia, does anyone seriously think that the world would be made safer by these two countries acquiring nuclear weapons? Already, the ongoing tensions between nuclear powers such as the USA and Russia or India and Pakistan are worrisome enough about a miscommunication, miscalculation, or inadvertent nuclear exchange not to mention the prospects or risks of a hot-headed, unstable leader rising to power and inheriting control over the nuclear button. These realities should make it plain to see that, clearly, the proliferation of more weapons does not make Earth a safer planet on which to live.
It is perfectly understandable why nations would want to acquire nuclear weapons. They wish to acquire nuclear weapons so that they can level the playing field or to gain strategic military parity with the nuclear powers. But, as I have stated elsewhere, two wrongs do not add up to or equal a right. That is to say, just because a few nations possess nuclear weapons does not make it right or a desirable outcome for more—or all—nations to possess nuclear weapons. To be sure, the nations that do possess nuclear weapons ought to be getting rid of them. Human energy and focus should be devoted to transforming Earth into some type of paradise, not destroying it with weapons and wars.
The Resolution: A New Mindset
What is the resolution for this arms-race conundrum or bind that humans find themselves entangled? What is the resolution for this nuclear snafu or predicament that the nuclear powers find themselves ensnared? Though easier said than done, the obvious, simple, and cheap resolution would be for humans to disarm. Much like gun owners do not wish to relinquish their guns, the reality is that nations do not wish to relinquish their weapons, particularly their nuclear bombs. Instead of the existence of a propensity or will to disarm, the opposite is the reality. That is to say, not to be outdone by other nations, nations incessantly compete to obtain the latest and greatest in firearm and weapons technology. With firearms and weapons of war in their possessions, humans get to play God. In an instant, they get to decide whether their opponent or adversary will live or die. There is one thing certain about death—and extinction—and it is this: Death is irreversible, unrecoverable, and final albeit some religions teach that another life does exist after death but only for the faithful to enjoy. Some humans become intoxicated with the God-like power that weapons confer upon them and, as a consequence, they are "all in" with weapons proliferation. Weapons represent one of those genies unleashed by humans, and it is most difficult to put back into the bottle.
I get it. I realize that a military or standing army is necessary to safeguard and defend a nation against irrational or ill-intentioned foreign aggressors. By the same token, at the local level, law enforcement officers are needed to safeguard society against aberrant and deranged citizens who attempt to harm, injure, or kill others—and also are needed to incarcerate those citizens who habitually or cavalierly violate the rule of law. A very important distinction is in order here: The ideal world that "can be" is not the current world that "is." As a result, in the real world that "is," prudence dictates that a nation be militarily prepared to defend its sovereignty against bad international actors. Whereas the military's primary focus is on coping with the current real world that "is," in contrast, I primarily am focused on nudging humans to embrace the ideal world that "can be." In this respect, the military and I are moving along two distinctive paths. While the military will continue to play its national protective role, I will continue to advocate for a different way of living without resorting to violence, hatred, prejudice, and the use of weapons to resolve disputes.
By the same token, I hold no grievance against or opposition to organized religions. I wholeheartedly support the freedom of religious worship. To be sure, I am a huge admirer of Jesus Christ and His teachings about love, peace, and goodwill—albeit, candidly and personally speaking, I do have my doubts about the miracles that Jesus Christ is said to have performed such as walking on water, giving sight to the blind, and raising the dead simply because such miracles defy common sense—not to mention the virgin birth—which, on the other hand, for believers of those miracles, it is the very essence of faith. While I am a staunch proponent of religious freedom, I also am a staunch proponent of the freedom of non-religious adherence. While I hold no grievance against organized religions, I admit that I am aggrieved when I witness instances of coercion, punishment, fighting, savagery, and killing being meted to non-conformists and non-believers in the name of a given religion—and there have been all too many instances of divisive, violent, extremist, fanatical, barbaric, and coercive human behavior committed in the name of religion throughout the course of human history. Lots of nefarious, heinous, and despicable acts or crimes against humanity have been committed by some humans against other humans in the name of a given religion.
| Major Religious Groups | Percent of Population | Population |
|---|---|---|
| Christianity | 31.40% | 2,250,438,000 |
| Islam | 23.20% | 1,662,744,000 |
| Hinduism | 15.00% | 1,075,050,000 |
| Secular (Nonreligious / Agnostic / Atheist) | 11.11% | 796,253,700 |
| Buddhism | 7.10% | 508,857,000 |
| Chinese traditional religion | 5.50% | 394,185,000 |
| Ethnic religions | 4.19% | 300,297,300 |
| African traditional religions | 1.40% | 100,338,000 |
| Sikhism | 0.32% | 22,934,400 |
| Spiritism | 0.21% | 15,050,700 |
| Judaism | 0.20% | 14,334,000 |
| Bahai | 0.10% | 7,167,000 |
| Jainism | 0.06% | 4,300,200 |
| Shinto | 0.06% | 4,300,200 |
| Cao Dai | 0.06% | 4,300,200 |
| Zoroastrianism | 0.04% | 2,866,800 |
| Tenrikyo | 0.02% | 1,433,400 |
| Neo-Paganism | 0.01% | 716,700 |
| Unitarian Universalism | 0.01% | 716,700 |
| Rastafari | 0.01% | 716,700 |
| Total world population circa 2012 | 100.00% | 7,167,000,000 |
| NOTE: The data on religions in the above table comes from Wikipedia.org and is based on Adherents.com's website. Adherents.com says "Sizes shown are approximate estimates, and are here mainly for the purpose of ordering the groups, not providing a definitive number." For a more definitive global statistical breakout on religions, see also The World Factbook. | ||
Table Credit: wikipedia.org
Previously, I made a distinction between what I am seeking to accomplish (that is, with "the Earth that can be") versus what the military is seeking to accomplish (that is, with "the Earth that is"). When it comes to religion, I would like to make another important distinction here. In the case of many organized religions, primarily their focus is on humans conducting their daily lives in religiously prescribed manners to achieve a state of bliss and eternity in an afterlife (or a life which begins again at some point after death). In contrast to organized religions, I, on the other hand, do not care anything at all about any type of an afterlife. My normal life span on Earth is enough living for me. I primarily am focused on the here and now with humans attaining a prosperous, bountiful, peaceful, and open Earth for all to enjoy without recourse to violence, hatred, prejudice, and killing but with recourse to courtesy and respect coupled with harnessing science and technology to elevate the human species to new heights of living buttressed and propelled by private property ownership, the free-market system, the rule of just law, individual liberties, sensible government regulations, and astute government land use planning. The gist of the distinction is this: Whereas both religion and I seek an Earth in which humans conduct their daily affairs on the highest ethical plane, religion primarily is focused on the goal of achieving a prized afterlife of eternal bliss whereas I exclusively am focused on achieving bountiful and peaceful living in the here and now for all members of the human species to enjoy—and for non-human life forms to enjoy, too.
Did you detect a certain irony? If not, the irony is this: From a military standpoint, I am more focused on an Earth that "can be" rather than the Earth that "is." From a religious standpoint, I am more focused on the human condition that "is" (in this life right now) rather than the human condition that "can be" (in an afterlife).
The Future: Heaven or Hell / Good or Evil on Earth
Being the eternal optimist, I continue to think that humans will do the right thing, choose good over evil, and forsake their weapons and wars. I continue to think that the human species will survive, advance, and thrive for millions of years to come.
Finding Eden
In closing this page, once again, I implore humans to choose a future of Heaven on Earth over Hell. I implore humans to choose Good over Evil. Will humanity, as a single species, ever find that elusive Garden of Eden on Earth as depicted in the painting below? Will love (or the will to survive through unity) conquer hate (or division and the propensity for extinction through nuclear war)? Up to the current point in human history as of 2018, a path to Heaven on Earth for the living to enjoy each day has eluded humans much like the fabled Fountain of Youth has eluded them. Nevertheless, I wish to take this page-closing moment to channel the great Stevie Wonder because, when it comes to future living, he is right on the one.
Peace. Hope. Goodwill. Tolerance. Cooperation. Compromise. Life. These are the pillars of sanity.
See Also: The Arc of Sanity [Golden Rule]
Scroll to Top of Page
