transport and travelling
Modern methods of transport have transformed our world into a village. Is this a blessing or a curse?
In some respects the topic-statement is true. Modern transport, especially by air, allows people to circle the globe in a few days, or hours, if an aircraft such as Concorde is used. Thus we have learnt to look upon distance as nothing. I can get to Paris from south-east England quicker than I can get to central London. So, the world has become a village? If so, the comparison ends there. In no respect does the world resemble a village community. Those who support the one-world movement no doubt share a great ideal but are, in fact, flying in the face of history, of present facts, and of any likelihood in the near future. Modern travel merely underlines the differences between races and nations. Rather than broaden the mind, travel confirms national prejudices. It may well lead to a greater international understanding, but to understand does not mean to agree, or to forgive. Modern travel may allow great athletes to meet every four years in friendship to discover the medal winners, but it would be naive to suppose that the Olympic Spirit had anything to do with the reality of international affairs or could possibly have any effect on them.
Of course modern transport cannot be blamed for the state of today's world. Like atomic energy, it is neutral, and the blessing or the curse results from the way in which it is used.
First, the benefits. Before the invention of the electric telegraph, news of a natural disaster in, say, an eastern country could only reach the west by steamship, so that by the time help reached a stricken area, it was too late to be of much use. Today, information by satellite, both in reports and pictures, is instantaneous. Response time is correspondingly quick. Modern transport planes can carry food, water and medical supplies to where they are needed in a matter of hours.
So the modern jet aircraft can help enormously in
In some respects the topic-statement is true. Modern transport, especially by air, allows people to circle the globe in a few days, or hours, if an aircraft such as Concorde is used. Thus we have learnt to look upon distance as nothing. I can get to Paris from south-east England quicker than I can get to central London. So, the world has become a village? If so, the comparison ends there. In no respect does the world resemble a village community. Those who support the one-world movement no doubt share a great ideal but are, in fact, flying in the face of history, of present facts, and of any likelihood in the near future. Modern travel merely underlines the differences between races and nations. Rather than broaden the mind, travel confirms national prejudices. It may well lead to a greater international understanding, but to understand does not mean to agree, or to forgive. Modern travel may allow great athletes to meet every four years in friendship to discover the medal winners, but it would be naive to suppose that the Olympic Spirit had anything to do with the reality of international affairs or could possibly have any effect on them.
Of course modern transport cannot be blamed for the state of today's world. Like atomic energy, it is neutral, and the blessing or the curse results from the way in which it is used.
First, the benefits. Before the invention of the electric telegraph, news of a natural disaster in, say, an eastern country could only reach the west by steamship, so that by the time help reached a stricken area, it was too late to be of much use. Today, information by satellite, both in reports and pictures, is instantaneous. Response time is correspondingly quick. Modern transport planes can carry food, water and medical supplies to where they are needed in a matter of hours.
So the modern jet aircraft can help enormously in