******

Hey there, Raven! Found this in the Green Room so thought I'd drop a review.

A simple title that sums it up well. You start your first stanza introducing us to a town , similiar to all the other towns in the world in every aspect the eye can spot. The town has two figures of authorities - the Lawmaker and the Councilman

In truth, they’re practically the same, yet neither likes the other

These have got to be my favourite lines portraying that because both their job entails the same duties, they find their pride clashing in an aimless claim of superiority over the other. Despite the fact that they could have been great friends and worked together, considering they understand the structure of the their profession better than anyone else in town, they choose to get in each other's way and pull the other one down. A very subtle way to point out their egoistic and arrogant nature indeed. Instead of choosing to back one another, they stand on opposite sides with the support of some of the townsfolk.

But most were somewhere in between, if not impartial

And some simply didn’t have the means to move their residence

I like how you shed light on the presence of the middleman caught in the crossfire between the political leaders. Most people today belong to neither side when it comes to extremist politics and wish to stay out of it, focusing more on their individual lives over petty rivalry. Feels good that you acknowledge this side of the world through the story of your town whereas most people look past them, despite the netural side comprising of the majority.

The second stanza lays an astounding contrast between the two sides and the the middle of the town. While either sides comprises of similiar people with matching ideologies, they're able to work together and function as one. But it's what's happening in the middle of the town that stands out to me.

Different, diverse of thought, yet they could still work together

Here no person is like the other. The have contrasting ideas and and often don't see eye to eye. However, they manage to keep their differences aside and work as one for the betterment of the town. Truly commendable and an apt depiction of what truly goes on in places harbouring people with varying background and thoughts.

The successive stanza brings us to the star of today's show- The Boulder. It lies in the middle of the town and attracts contrasting comments from the townsfolk. Some view it as a historic relic, while the others call it an ugly hindrance. The children enjoy its shade while some elders like to sunbathe lying over it. On the other hand, some residents believe its jagged edges to be dangerous to walk around.

The Lawmaker and Councilman see an opportunity and jump in to lead action regarding it. The Lawmaker rallies support to get the boulder removed and destroyed while Councilman claims that it must protected as it a glorious symbol of their town itself. The Councilman continues to argue that the Lawmaker is the one who has made the boulder a problem, as it had never been one before.

The feud drags on as both sides gather support against one another. Meanwhile the ones who actually live near the boulder are put off by the radical politics swarming around them.

Those who didn’t echo the sentiment of their side faced criticism

This line particularly appealed to me as I believe it can be interpreted two different ways, not sure if it was intentional.
The first interpretation - If someone who previously supported the Lawmaker, now believes the boulder to be of historic importance and thus worthy of protection, he'd stand out as a black sheep. Similarly, if someone on the Councilman's side wanted the boulder gone, he'd become the white crow and as a result, face public criticism. Thus not only you have to align with the thought of what to do with the boulder, but also the leader directing that side of thought
The second interpretation - Noise was being encouraged. Mere standing for either side isn't enough. People are expected to loudly declare their position and persuade others to join their side. You must advocate and spread the word around. This all is far from what should've been the ideal approach. Both sides draft a reason and quietly make the townspeople aware of the pros and cons of each side. The entire town must work together to get to a conclusion and resolve to voting if things can't be solved through diplomatic discussions alone .

The tale moves on as it begins to turn ugly. Things no longer remain civil. While the Lawmaker's side begins vandalizing the rock, the Councilman declares imprisonment for even come close to the boulder. As the fight turns pettier, the common man gets fed up of the dirty tactics being used.

Why? Because to put it simply, humans love to divide themselves

And going to battle over mundane matters is second-nature

Loved how you redirect the ending to humanity in general, that still applies to the story of your town with the boulder. No conclusion is reached as the townspeople engage themselves in an endless and meaningless quarrel over a rock, each side just going on for the sake of being prover right or superior. The poetry seems incomplete, with no final decision announced. Did the Lawmaker succeed in getting the boulder destroyed? Did the Councilman manage to protect the boulder? Did they keep fighting forever and neither side landed victory? We're not told. The readers are left to guess the ending . But the implication is clear- No decision ever gets made.

The poem is an eye opener to the reality we humans live in. We create borders not to unify the people falling within it, but to engage in rivalry the people who fall beyond. The cost of patriotism is humanity. Astounding realism. Loved the flow of the story, the depiction of the impartial townsfolk and the taunt on humanity.