The Swamp is powered by Vocal creators. You support Katie Thurston by reading, sharing and tipping stories... more

The Swamp is powered by Vocal.
Vocal is a platform that provides storytelling tools and engaged communities for writers, musicians, filmmakers, podcasters, and other creators to get discovered and fund their creativity.

How does Vocal work?
Creators share their stories on Vocal’s communities. In return, creators earn money when they are tipped and when their stories are read.

How do I join Vocal?
Vocal welcomes creators of all shapes and sizes. Join for free and start creating.

To learn more about Vocal, visit our resources.

Show less

What Democracy?

When government heads lead a country into war without a mandate, it epitomises them as criminals masquerading as a government.

The turmoil in Syria has been evident since the initial uprising in 2011, with the detrimental effects of the Civil War on innocent civilians appearing on an international scale. In September of 2015, the haunting image of a 3-year-old boy's body made global headlines after it was found washed up on a shore in Turkey. With this image, there were evident calls for change and a need to bring "humanity" back to human life. Outrage. Upset. Anger. Internationally, people were gripped by the harsh realities of escaping a Civil War but this upset was also met with contempt, exhibiting the most selfish qualities of human nature as countries with the ability to substantiate change—failing to do so, in supposed "fear" of their own safety. 

In the latest turning point of a long and terrifying war, the death of dozens of civilians on 7 April in Douma due to a chemical attack is undeniably a heartbreaking statistic and unfortunately not an uncommon one, either. But with no concrete evidence of the Syrian government using chemical weapons in such an attack, it appears as a crisis in humanity that some of the worlds wealthiest super-powers submerge themselves into another war, void of concrete evidence. Theresa May announced in her official statement that she has taken military action in "Britain's national interest" and declares a lack of alternative options, a ludicrous thought considering the national uproar that has already followed her actions. Further, May stated that her thoughts were with "our brave British servicemen and women" and while there is no doubting the selflessness and loyalty of our soldiers, it would also be pertinent to apply such gratitude to those that will subsequently suffer due to our own military involvement in Syria. 

It is such intervention that poses the following questions: How can a woman that seamlessly supports the Saudi regime in Yemen, perhaps the most fundamental humanitarian crisis at this given time, justify the apparent necessity to send missiles to Syria? Did Iraq teach us nothing? Did Tony Blair's actions not teach future leaders a lesson? Did Libya not give us a cause to approach aggression in a different manner? Did Afghanistan not enlighten us on what ruthless violence can cause? Violence is a riptide and its impact is exponential, but it appears that in our privileged, white-dominated society terrorism is only applicable if it stems from the Middle East, while we are completely blindsided by our own involvement in such heinous crimes. 

There is no doubt that the world has to do more in order to ensure the safety of innocent civilians—but ruthlessly attacking a shattered nation without evidence nor a mandate is the height of cruelty itself. Violence does not eradicate violence, it worsens it. Only political intervention should be enforced in such drastic circumstances and Corbyn's call for an "independent UN-led investigation" appears as fundamentally the most morally just action in this instance, pushing for resolution as opposed to further violence. The recent actions imposed by May signal the height of hypocrisy; her actions have been based upon no evidence and there has been no parliamentary discussion, so what differs May's supposed "democracy" from the dictatorships of Assad and Putin?

In a time where May consistently reiterates that there is "no magic money-tree" and the British government is failing to provide for the most fundamental components of our society, it becomes an enraging thought that millions of pounds can be sourced for the mindless attacking of vulnerable lives. The magic money-tree exists when concerning foreign intervention, but in the realms of aiding suffering social structures of our society, it ceases to exist. If one country can afford to go to war, it can also afford to help—so rather than imposing such a knee-jerk reaction and continually fighting violence with violence, help to those that are vulnerable appears necessary. There is no doubt that the enforcers of such violence must be sanctioned, but jeopardizing an entire nation's ability to survive is only furthering the gains made by those that want to see it fall.  

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King Jr.


Now Reading
What Democracy?
Read Next
Possible Gun Control Solutions