It's been a while since the elephants left the room. The exposure to news about the escalation of conflict in the Eastern hemisphere is everywhere. Not only do we become aware of human beings being murdered, but we hear day and night on our own social platforms how the use of silence and symbols might play a key role in perpetuating or stopping such conflicts.
The pressure to show your position towards it is becoming increasingly real. And yet, the society multiplying that pressure is also exposed to a five-star narrative aiming to entertain us about Colombia's armed conflict. Again. A conflict that has contributed to the murder of 450,664 human beings* from 1985 to 2018 -not counting the undocumented deaths since the sixties, when the war started-.
I must admit there is nothing particular about that conflict when comparing it to others. It's all about the same old terrorism, corruption, ownership of productive lands and politics. In the case of Colombia, there's quite a unique shortcut to link all these triggers of death: money. The money they make when growing cocaine on lands that were supposed to grow veggies, fruits or coffee. Lands that were supposed to be places to educate people with dreams. Like the dreams of Adriana Ocampo, Luis Díaz, Shakira, Leonor Espinosa or Sofía Vergara.
It's 2024, and the country is still trying to find a way out of that conflict. I'm not sure what the solution is. But I can safely say that popcorn narratives don't have too much to add. I'm not talking about the narrative of Pablo Escobar patronised as "the Drug Lord" (It's so two thousand and late?). Now I am speaking about matronising "the Cocaine Godmother": Griselda Blanco (1943-2012), sentenced to jail for crimes linked to the exact same conflict.
And here my confused brain is, wondering to what extent there's no longer an extent between the conflicts that northern economies battle and those that southern economies are laughed at. Is it the chaotic nature of our human double standards?
Interestingly, I have nothing against the narrative itself. It makes money because it entertains. If I don't like it, I just don't watch it -no drama behind that. My questioning starts when I am asked what flag I stand for in the conflicts we see developing in the East. Am I wrong to believe that now I need to use symbols to support one of the two sides of the conflict if I am to be socially approved?
That's where the noise in my mind comes from. When was the last (even the first) time I saw you updating your profile picture with the Colombian flag when the country needed your support?
Apart from the primary value of human lives, petrol and cereals are a priority to the current functioning of northern civilisations, so it makes sense that we humans expect, apart from ceasefires, long-lasting dialogues to put an end to long-lasting conflicts. But let's not forget that bananas, coffee, and avocados are also key in the functioning of northern economies.
What is it that makes it so normal and entertaining to admire cultural symbols that reduce a region to the production and distribution of drugs in such a popcorn way? As far as my tomatoes are aware, I haven't been exposed to a world-class narrative where cultural symbols emphasise the regions with the consumption of those same drugs. Oh, double moral. What would be of us without you!
Question the need to make your friends change their minds towards events you have a clear stand to. It's human and sensitive to feel appalled by the cruelty of war. Now, let us all ensure our sensitivity doesn't get mixed up with selectivity. No one symbol of war deserves my popcorn. What about you?
*Figure captured on 20/01/2024 from Comisión de La Verdad, a State-endorsed organisation.
Copyright © 2024 Haroldmosquera.co.uk. All rights reserved.