Ever since the dawn of civilization there has been war over territory and resources. We have waged war at least once every fifty years for our entire existance. Though it is often a much shorter time before we start a new one. I pose a few questions to you about the necessities of war, why did we have it in the beginning? Is it relevant in our world anymore?
My opinion is that of pacifism. Perhaps in the beginning war was necessary for survival and furthering of our species. Competition over resources provided that genes that favoured stronger and smarter bodies to survive and to that we can attribute a greater part of our intelligence today. Consider where most of the technology that we develop was going to be used for in the first place. In our world where travel time has been reduced to a few hours to get anywhere in the world it is irresponsible to continue to fight for resources when free trade is readily available.
Aside from the fact that war can be avoided in all circumstances, how can we possibly reconcile the fact that we are senselessly murdering thousands of people. Perhaps it is the thought process that kill one and it's a tragedy, kill thousands and it's a statistic. It is unfortunate that we waste life so quickly on the battlefield and then those who are for the war say that the pacifists are not supporting the troops. I wonder if it is those that wish the troops to stay alive or those that see them die support them more.
8 comments:
I like Vegetius' old saying, "Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." The translation for that is, "Therefore, whoever wishes for peace, let him prepare for war."
War is sometimes necessary. It is a horrible thing and should be used as a last resort but it is relevant in certain situations. Adolf Hitler is a prime example. You can not tell me that going to war with the Germans and Japanese was completely unjustified. Is it possible that someone like Hitler would not respond to anything but force? I think that to sum up every war as completely unnecessary is a distorted truth. Also remember, we’re looking at wars that have come and passed, and hind sight is 20/20. Where as we saw the outcome and every side of the arguments leading up to that specific war, the people of the time could not have seen all of what we have saw.
This is a very good point, however you cannot say an allout war was the best action, although it certainly was the most effective. War is also a great economy boost, however I do not think a country should venture into war on the sole purpose of boosting their economy. It is simply an "upside" to war. For lack of better words, war also helps with "croud control". The world has roughly 6 billion people on it now, which is constantly growing and I think that things are getting a little too crouded around here...Humans have no natural enemy but themselves so I think war is a natural process of cutting down numbers in the "flock".
As for cutting down the numbers of the flock, I'd say disease has that realm covered better than war does. Also the economy in the past has been boosted by war, but I don't see it in this one. To Subliminal, most people respond to diplomacy very well as incentives can override their desire for kill. If we had captured or if no better option was available, killed Hitler, it would definitely be possible to reconcile with the rest of the leaders.
I agree it'd be great if warfare were eliminated, but I don't think it's possible for one reason... human greed. Free trade will never be 100% perfect because of greed. We always want more than we have as if it will fill whatever void we are feeling. At some point someone will realize they can try and use force to get more of whatever it is they desire and war will start anew. Even if one person had a super-weapon and threatened to use it on a country or people unless we all "get along" that person would have to be an amazing person of love and compassion to rule without preferential treatment on a country or person. And even if that person existed, unless they were immortal, can we be 100% certain their successor would be as benevolent? I think basic human greed counteracts that utopia.
Human greed..., there are always individuals that will wish to beat the system. Although the problem with the thought that it won't work, is that if the system can be implemented, it will be exceedingly difficult to go against societies norms. Same problems we have today, once a meme becomes popular it is already to late to go against it as it has evolved to a point that it eliminates the competition.
Right, so war is pretty much unbeatable. We could always change every single world leader to ones insanely against war or destroy all the nuclear weapons in the world, but nothing will ever take place for those events to happen. There will always be corruption and hunger for power.
War is an eventuality, but only because people are stupid. You look at them, finding value in a piece of paper, paying attention to lines on a map that are invisible in real life, following laws they don't agree with, believing in deities manufactured soley to control them. No wonder dogs cock their head, and furl up thier brow when they look at us.
Obviously, war is a business, first and foremost. Eisenhour warned us about it when he coined the term "Military Industrial Complex" in his farewell address to the nation as president. It supports our economy, and it is necessary to start wars of aggression against whoever we can make a good enough excuse to attack. It is supported by the money, and the money is the only party who benefits from it. It's the golden rule (not the Christian one)... "He who has the gold, makes the rules."
The only thing you need to do to keep the war business going is to keep people stupid, and loyal. You use terms like patriot, and hero to make dying for a rich man's benifit seem romantic. You scare the citizenry with completely absurd scenarios of foreign armies pouring over your own borders (or sometimes.. mushroom clouds). Then you support their belief in one of the money created gods, and tell them when they die everything will be amazing. (i.e. Heaven, 50 virgins, Valhalla... etc.)When they're scared, and you've got them convinced that they share in some great society you happen to own, plus you've got them believing that when they die things will be better than when they were alive, you won't have to ask them to die for you. They will line up willingly, with smiling faces, and dive half hazzardly into mine fields with barbed wire and machine guns in your name for purposes they don't know and could never understand.
You think I'm crazy by now right? I support my statement with one single thought. No soldier has ever benefited from the war he fought in, even if he lived to tell about it.
A fantastic study on the depth of this perversion can be read in the novel "All Quiet on the Western Front." - Erich Maria Remarque.
PEACE!
-Jammo
To quote from Borat "Very nice" That was well thought out and very well put. I agree with you completely and I thank you for posting such a well written entry.
Post a Comment