Organized Madness

"In individual madness, there is something rare... but in groups, nations, and epochs, it is the norm." Friedrich Nietzsche

With this philosophical density, one can read what the world is experiencing today not as a fleeting chaos, but as a complete structural condition: madness that does not occur outside the system, but is produced within it. Crises are no longer exceptions that threaten stability, but have become a method of managing it. It is as if the international system, in its current phase, can only maintain its existence by reproducing imbalance and distributing its costs to the weaker parties.

Since the end of the Cold War, there has been a prevailing belief that the world is moving toward a rational model governed by rules and institutions. However, this perception was fragile, as it assumed the existence of a moral balance equivalent to a balance of power. What actually happened is the opposite: a system was built that can manage interests, but is incapable of producing justice. With the rise of new powers and the decline of others, we entered a phase of "strategic fluidity," where there is no longer a fixed reference point, but a network of moving interests that changes faster than politics can comprehend.

In this context, wars have transformed from a failure of politics into a tool of it. War is no longer a moment of collapse, but a mechanism of control. In the Russian-Ukrainian war, the results extended beyond the battlefield, reshaping energy and food markets and redrawing alliances. Similarly, in the Gaza war, the confrontation transcended its geographical limits, becoming a practical test of the credibility of the international system in applying its standards.

However, this system does not collapse comprehensively, but selectively. It maintains its rigor when major interests are at stake and relaxes when it comes to weaker nations. Here, Palestine is not manifesting merely as a political issue, but as a function within this system: a site where the costs of global imbalance are redirected. The Palestinian does not pay the price of a local conflict, but the price of a compounded international failure—a failure to impose the law, to curb power, and to protect human dignity when its existence conflicts with calculations of influence.

In Gaza, the catastrophe has ceased to be an exceptional event and has become a permanent state. Destruction is not just a result of war, but a mode of management. Daily life turns into an open space for the reproduction of tragedy, where humanity is reduced to a number, and time is reduced to waiting between one blow and another. This is not merely a humanitarian failure but an expression of a logic that views the continuation of crisis as a means to maintain broader balances.

The dangerous part is that this "organized madness" is not confined to conflict zones, but extends to the structure of the global economy and politics. Economic crises are piling up, populisms are rising, and international institutions are losing their ability to influence. In Europe, long presented as a model of stability, deep internal shifts reveal increasing fragility. The rise and fall of figures like Viktor Orban reflects a deeper crisis related to the capacity of regimes to adapt to domestic and external pressures.

At the same time, major international powers are moving to reshape their relations, not with the goal of achieving lasting stability, but to avoid the costs of comprehensive conflicts. The result is not a more balanced system, but a more complex web of intertwined crises. It is no longer possible to separate one war from another, or a crisis from its global context. Everything has become so interconnected that any disruption at one point reverberates throughout the entire network.

In this scene, Palestine gains a significance that transcends its geographical borders. It is not merely the issue of a people seeking freedom, but a real test of the nature of the world we live in. If this world is unable to end a clearly defined tragedy, documented in image and sound, it means that the flaw lies not in capacity, but in will.

The question is no longer: who is responsible for what is happening? But rather: how did this become possible in the first place? How did standards turn into selective tools, laws into powerless texts, and humans into secondary variables in power equations? The answer lies in the structure of the system itself, which no longer sees stability as a goal, but rather as a temporary outcome of managing conflict.

In the end, the world does not seem to be heading toward a comprehensive explosion, but rather toward a continuous state of "managed instability." A state in which crises are periodically reproduced, so as to remain under control without being resolved. In every cycle, the cost is paid by the same parties.

Here, stands Palestine. Not as an exception, but as a rule. Not as a transient victim, but as a mirror. What happens there does not only reveal the tragedy of a people, but also the nature of a global system that has lost its balance and seeks to maintain its existence by generalizing its imbalance. And if this system is not rebuilt on fairer foundations, then the "madness" Nietzsche spoke of will not remain a philosophical description, but will become the permanent reality lived by everyone—at different degrees, but under the same logic.