The poor poor-man

Country ‘A’ has many types of people – hindus, harijans, rich, middle class, gujaratis etc.. As far as I know, ‘B’ has caucasians, aborigines and new settlers. ‘C’ has rich, pashtuns and others. ‘D’ has locals, rich-migrants and slaves.

Recently, A is in conflict with B, because the not-so-poor of A got into a bad sustaining brawl with the poor of B in the latter’s backyard. The poor of B, they complained, “hey, you took away our jobs, mate!” and also used some nanchas and knives. So, the not-so-poor from A, but living poor in B take to the streets and protest before their rich, also hoping to attract attention of their rich in A as well. In response because of some responsibility, the rich representatives of A take the earliest flight to talk to their not-so-poor and also the government of B. Both the governments of A and B when asked, say they are monitoring the situation and are trying their best to get it under control.

The same A is also in some senseless conflict with C which doesn't has any true basis. And also avoids discussing its true relationship with D. So, these rich representatives of A return back from B and get into a more time consuming work of organising high level peace talks with the rich of C, or organising protocol events for the guest from D who loves the exodus of poor from A so he can turn them into local slaves when they move to D.

All these variables, from 'A' to 'D' are interrelated in some form or other. Everything is about the poor man, but it seems the cause is just lost somewhere, somewhere in rhetoric.