A New Era behind the Door for Humanity?

Abstract

In the essay, the author starts from a paradox: no people desires war and no parent would choose to expose their children to death, yet conflicts in the world increase. The author hypothesizes that this increase may be a “transitory” phase towards a more peaceful future but recognizes that the phenomenon remains a puzzle and requires identifying the factors that, in contemporary societies, open the way to enlistment and even offensive wars. At the base there is first of all the desire to prevail, which feeds rivalries and logic of domination. Added to this is the relative scarcity of goods and resources, which pushes individuals and groups to accumulate far beyond what is necessary; this dynamic translates, in modern times, into an endless race for enrichment and power. A further “fuel” of conflicts is identified in social hatred and envy of the well-being of others, feelings that, added to inequalities, make it easier to accept or justify confrontation as a solution. The author then addresses the political knot: how can a community be forced to wear the uniform and fight when the majority of families would be against it? Even in democracies, he argues, the decision to war is in fact in the hands of the government and parliament, representative bodies that can act without a specific popular mandate on that choice. This disconnect would be favored by the decline in political participation compared to the post-war period: less militancy, less public debate, less widespread control over the “hottest” decisions, including military ones. To make the reasoning concrete, the US example is recalled and the foreign and military policy choices decided even in the presence of internal dissent. He also links the persistence of conflicts to economic and financial interests, citing in particular the role of oil and speculation (including through rising energy prices), which can indirectly support the continuation of wars and generate negative effects on the global economy. In this context, secrecy and the concentration of decision-making in restricted circles (“a small living room”) also weigh heavily, sometimes justified by operational needs but capable of reducing transparency and democratic accountability. On the ethical level, the text recalls the moral condemnation of war expressed by the Pope and, on the legal level, art. 11 of the Italian Constitution, which repudiates war as an instrument of offense against the freedom of other peoples. The author concludes by indicating a basic direction of reform: to really reduce conflicts, we need a model oriented towards common welfare, the distribution of surpluses and finally a market without money with access to the families of the destitute, capable of limiting the excessive accumulation of wealth and inequalities that fuel resentment, competition and, finally, war.