@CapitalB I would say that the focus on countries really overlooks the more important factor of individuals, making sure that people are able to get honest information if they care about the situation.
The focus on countries instead of people promotes nationalism that all too often buys into the propaganda. Either put out by or supporting those countries.
@CapitalB and yet that doesn't disclose the possibility that the country will fail.
Just because an eventuality is bad doesn't mean it won't happen.
It's even more reason to recognize that truth and work hard to make sure it doesn't happen. Even more reason to recognize the interface between institutions and humans because the worst case scenarios are pretty darn bad.
Neutrality has a demand in both directions built in.
These days victim culture tries to annihilate acceptance of anything neutral. If you send food to one side then the other side cant say foul. That is not how it works.
Also you cant be shamed into doing something. Any help is completely volontary.
@volkris @Nazareno
My example is Swiss neutrality as defined and enforced in 1815. We need more big institutions to just remain neutral. Be it the IOC, BIS, ISO or...Walmart.
Neutrality from top down enables individuals to seek alternative ways. It is like a unplanted plot were those living there can wait and see and learn by doing.
Neutrality does neither mean doing nothing nor ignoring the world. It ranges from silent time to reflect to outright help the commoners from the start.