Crime in Crimea

Elsewhere, Everywhere

I have always wondered from childhood through adolescence, and now when it is time for me to fade out, which part of human history is not riddled with crime, or mostly criminal? I am not asking “least criminal” simply because I have no evidence of when criminality was not a major tool for survival or making of history.  As I have trudged warily through my life in search of understanding the meaning of truth and grasping what we humans are, or for that matter what life is all about, I have found that every step that mankind has taken forward has been achieved by trampling upon the fundamentals of the ethics that he himself created.

Grabbing land, property, territory in the name of foraging for food; creation of religions and then going to war and pillaging rapaciously to enforce unprovable beliefs; when was it decided and by whom, that survival necessitates the analytical distillation and refinement of acts of criminality of one sort or another. Treaties, agreements, signatories to codes of conduct, the judiciary itself, which is supposed to preside over and has been created for the explicit, much bandied and pronounced purpose of curbing criminality: have they become perpetrators and collaborators?

In the history of the past two to three centuries, when mankind’s reach over the earth through navigational aids became larger, many agreements and treaties were signed following bloody massacres and depredations. The modern ones are the Geneva Convention, the International Court of Justice at the Hague, the Treaty of Versailles, the United Nations. They are all in place, or were. Have they stopped criminals, or are they also part and parcel of the innate criminality which their masters and creators have drafted as part of a conspiracy for what mankind would call its survival as long as it can last, as long as it can be extended. What did organisations like NATO, CENTO, CHOGM, SEATO, accomplish by elaborate conferencing, pronouncements and stratagems? (How about SHALNOT, CANOT, WART, SMART, XYANDZEE?)

I do not know. What I know however is that there is growing poverty, incrementally increasing dissent, disaffection with polity, crime. If anyone does know the answer, please help me.

-------------------------------
Charu wrote:
Bhai,

I know nothing. With that caveat I will resort to Charles Darwin's maxim; survival for the fittest. 

In reference to human civilization people do interpret 'survival' and 'fittest' to their own liking. Unlike animal kingdom; when stomach is full the hunt is left for the future date when it will be hungry again. Not so among humans. They must amass; land, food, money and whatever is considered wealth or power; that includes having more of goats, cows among Masai, Kikuyu and such tribes in Africa and elsewhere.

My two cents' worth.

--------------------------------------------
My reply:

Statistically there is more crime than punishment, from the dawn of civilisation and, I  firmly believe, to the day of Perdition, which would be a fitting finale for all the punishment not meted out.