10. Klasse Gymnasium

December 3rd 2015

Book page 27/3

Will the younger Generation be able to overcome the divide that exists at present?

The segregation officially ended long time ago but still there is a big divide between Afro-Americans and Anglo-Americans. Even if in some places „white and black“ work live and play together, in the most cases it is two different groups. Some of us hope that the younger generation will be able to bridge this divide between the races in the USA. The qouestion is if this hope will be fulfilled.

The younger generation has the possibility to bridge that divide because they are able to change themselves and get more open-minded. Now while the world is getting more and more modern, the Anglo-Americans don't need any slaves anymore because of the robots and other machines that where invented in the last hundred years. There is also much better science than one century or even longer ago so that the Anglo-Americans know that people are not more valuable than other people because of their white skin. This makes the younger generation able to live in one righteous community independent to their races.

I think that, if the younger generation wants to stop the racism this generation is able to do it. The main problem is that many people are stubborn and don't want to have contact with other races. But when the majority of the US-Americans is willing to have peace with all inhabitants of the USA this generation will make the change.

December 5th 2015

Can Violence be justified as a way of achieving political aims?

Today most of us know people like "Malcolm X" or "Martin Luther King. I myself confess that I got to know Malcolm X a few days ago. And as I also know M.L.K.(I knew him before too) I see that in one thing they are very different: Martin Luther King wants the Afro- and Anglo-Americans to live together in peace, while Malcolm X thinks that revenge is a justified act against whites. It is now a difficult question if the violence Malcolm X wanted to use can be justified and if violence can be justified in any situation when a person wants to achieve political aims.

At first violence is not useful because it causes the opponent to use force too. As long as

you are not able or not willing to fully erase the adversary, the adversary, If he is not more decent than you, will attack you back after attacking you. We can see this in every war. For example when the Austrian archduke was assassinated in Bosnia, about one century ago, Austria invaded Bosnia some time later and "world war I" started. In this way the violence of on group caused the others to be violent too and led to worldwide desaster. So violence is not useful enough to be justified as a way to achieve political aims.

Second violence is just inhuman. Violence does not help the human race to exist as a firm

group of individuals. Already in the bible it is told that the Israelites fought against one of their tribes and the men of this tribes had not enouhg women to reproduce their families after the war had ended. If in one war only a few people die, a part of our history, our society and our science dies even in this the smallest war. Consequently as the violence causes us as the human race to die it can not be justified.

As I have said I think that violence can not and may not be justified. Every conflict can be

soluted if the involved individuals are eager to get a compromise. This can happen without any weapons. This may be an utopia but I think it can be fulfilled if all people live after the moral understanding God gave them without searching for their own profit.