Yes I am alive, and commenting on the delusion of choice

So it's been ages since I posted on here. I've been busy with work, skiing, getting a social life here, etc. and just haven't been 'around' as much online as I used to be.

When I was younger I always thought and said that I'd settle down when I got older, and not live the expatriate life like I did as a child. I was fairly adamant about it and I didn't see why I would change my mind. And yet, somewhere in the last 5 years of my life, that opinion has changed. What I struggle to pinpoint is the reason for that change. I mean, lets face it, any TCK can see that there are advantages of living the 'normal' life and growing some roots. There's the stability, the chance to learn a culture in-depth and, given enough time, maybe even become a part of it. There's the fact that you can surround yourself with friends, who can eventually become very good and trusted friends. If you have a family after you settle down, you can raise your kids in a 'normal' setting. Even if it's not your 'home' country or city, it will be your childrens' home country or city, and that way you can avoid putting them through the same difficulties, struggles and issues that you had to go through.

On the other hand, if I were to do that, would I be throwing away the opportunity to build on the incredibly enriching experience I've experienced in the first 21 years of my life? Somehow I can't help but wonder, despite the price you pay as a TCK when you're growing up in terms of rootlessness, loneliness, lack of belonging etc., what the additional cost of leaving all of that behind would be? Because the thing is, what if all of that good stuff doesn't happen? Obviously if you're going to try to settle down, you have to really commit to it. If you throw the towel in after 4 or 5 years, you haven't really tried. But what if after 10 or 15 years it still just isn't working? If I haven't made the close friends I imagine everyone else who is settled in one place has, if I haven't adapted to the culture the way I thought I would, if I haven't found a girl who can understand me, if I don't like my job, if it turns out I've chosen the wrong place to settle... how do I choose a place to settle down in anyway? On what basis, what criteria? As I get closer to graduating, this question crops more and more often. Soon I'll have to find a job - but 'the world is my oyster' as they say. I have no reason to restrict my job search by any of the traditional boundaries, apart from language perhaps, and there isn't even always a clear line there either. There's no reason why I couldn't just get up one day and decide to go to the other side of the world and live there for a couple of years. It just seems like such a daunting task, that I don't even know where to start - I don't even have a continent to aim for - and as a result I'm getting nowhere on that front.

But I digress. These days, more and more, I feel like I want to continue living as an expatriate. I don't know if it's just become a habit now, or if it's a fear of the unknown (which a 'traditional' life is), or if it's the fear of not succeeding at settling down. If it doesn't work out, I'll have wasted a huge chunk of my life, and for what? And even if I do manage, who's to say it's the right decision? I could be happy, but what if I could've been happier? I guess maybe I'm just reluctant to let go of what has been such a large part of my life. Heck, what HAS been my life.

I think what I'm trying to say is that I don't see any reason why the answers I'm looking for are more likely to come up in 'normal' life than in the expatriate life. Maybe it's just the delusion of choice, but I seem to have lost the way of thinking where I figured that settling down was the way I wanted to live, and it's been replaced by a complete lack of direction and focus in my life, which has been translated by my brain into 'keep doing what you've been doing'. Whether or not that's the right attitude, I suppose only time will tell.

The UN

This isn't very TCK-related, but it's essentially an international topic and it cracks me up. I found an article entitled "Why the United States just doesn't get the United Nations". The article's kind of interesting, but what caught my attention was the second comment, at the bottom:

All very flowery, but why would we (the US) want to support an organization that is blatantly anti-American and works unceasingly to strip all countries of their sovereignty?

I like the American way of life and I resent any organization that tries to strip my rights from me, especially if it’s not an organization over which I have any electoral sway.

The UN displays in innumerable ways its contempt for this country, its people, and our beliefs.

I’m glad that you feel so passionately about the UN. I also feel passionately about it. I think it should be forced from our shores. Let someone else give them a home, but keep them out of our country, out of our politics and out of our lives.

It’s bad enough the control the US government has over our individual lives. Let’s multiply that by 1000 and have a one-world government.

Thanks, but I’ll pass.

As you can see, it's the first sentence that stood out for me. First of all, what, exactly, has the UN ever done that has "stripped the US of its sovereignty"? But more importantly, it's the anti-Americanism claim that bugs me.

Let's use an example. Say you want to go scuba-diving. You don't know how to, so you decide that the best way to do so would be to join a club. So you go along to the club, use the equipment, go on trips that they organise - but you don't pay. Not the membership fee, not for equipment rental, not for transport for trips. So, realistically, how do you expect anyone to respect you, care about your opinion or treat you the way you want? It's the same situation with the US and the UN. They treat it with total disdain, they do not use it as a tool on the international politics stage. As far as I'm concerned, if they don't pay their dues, they shouldn't be allowed to be a member any longer. Sadly I doubt they'd care.

Now it's true that the UN has it's flaws - like any person or organisation. They have had some serious failures, when you look at for example their withdrawal from Haiti in 1993, mistakes in Rwanda in '94, etc. But despite their problems, inefficiencies and oversights, the UN has served a purpose - such as the election in Cambodia in the early 90's (or was it the late 80's?). Or look at statistics. Since the Cold War (which really hindered their work) there has been a huge drop in the number of deadly conflicts and genocides. And as the article above points out, politicians now have an arena where they can discuss and argue about issues around the world. That alone is a reason to say that the UN can succeed.

Mind you, the rest of the author's comment was a fairly impressive display of ignorance as well. Since when has the UN threatened the American way of life? How does it display contempt for the American people and their beliefs? Basically the comment just represents the opinion of an ignorant American who resents the fact that despite being a superpower the rest of the world still holds them responsible for their actions and expects them to abide by a simple human decency that, sadly, doesn't seem to be innately engrained in our souls. Sorry, but that's not how it works. Even if you have more nuclear weapons than the rest of us, you don't have a complete carte blanche to do whatever you want in the rest of the world.