Marriage of Convenience

The state where both sides mutually benefit doing something together which in most case not necessarily both side have any friendship can be termed as “Marriage of Convenience”. This is what is presently happening between countries and people where one may not like the other but there do things together so that one benefits from the others activities and the other gets some gain.

The most straight forward example of the marriage of convenience is here. Some people from the developing countries aspire to go to the developed ones. The other processes become too costly in the long run. So there hook up with either a male or female depending and get married with a native of the developed country for a price and other agreements but not for the true worth of marriage.

In this case the one from the developing country makes the developed one rich and one he is in the developed country he has the freedom to earn sending back wealth to his country.

Another case which we can call marriage of convenience is when students aspire to go abroad that again from the developing ones to the developed ones. More of than 60% of them do not actually go for the intended purpose, that is studies and if they really wanted proper education, there are cheaper destination closer to home. The actual purpose is to work if they can and earn the increase wages and send back home.

Why I referred to this as a marriage of convenience, is because of this. The institutes and government know it for a fact that most of them do not end up getting educated, but bring in money for the country. More so over, the people of the developed countries do not want to do manual jobs and plus the companies would have to pay the true wages set by the government of that developed country, they can pay these so called student labourers very much less, but better than what they could expect doing a white collar job in their own country. Isn’t this a funny example of marriage of convenience?

The other marriage of convenience comes about in the diplomatic area. Heads of countries, even thought the ideology of the two countries do not match will go to war against a poor nation. This can actually be proven in the case of Syria. The heads of the developed countries, namely USA, Britain, France and some other were on the brink of punitive punishment on the country all because it supposedly killed its own citizens with chemicals who in this case were rebelling against the government of their own country.

The fact is we do not know if they really did do so, but fortunately the damage was quickly averted all because of the people of the developed countries did not like the previous marriage of convenience which brought on the same reason and has proved nothing in that case but a costly war and regime change.

This time the marriage of convenience broke down and the United States was left to carry the baby which finally made her backtrack for all good reason and at the same time Syria understood that it should give the United Nations the stockpile of it chemical weapons to destroy all because if one in the favour of those who love the marriage of convenience, will do the deed and the blame would fall squarely on its shoulders.

Fortunately for the USA, they learnt their lesson and they know that they had made a mark for themselves as being the most bellicose country in the world. They use every illogical ratiocination to prove their dominance. It is so that they can get to prove they are the ones to be feared and the rest of humanity and their principles to living are sub-justified.

This marriage of convenience is not justifiable as each and every one of us are humans and the demeaning jobs of having a passport to transcend the boundaries of countries where we become second class citizens for who we and our ideologies is not acceptable. This was not what was in the past, we if we had the capacity could move from any sphere of the earth to another and we know that the earth is one.

Land belongs to no specific country or individual; we just build walls more in our contemporary times rather than in the past. The breaking of these religious, ethnic, and ideological barriers would mentor well for humanity as a whole. Till then, we will all be bound by the fascist belief of self first and you later.

Steven William Pitts