Should war be the permanent condition of humanity?

Question

?

Answer 1

I think it's a permanent condition of stupidity

Answer 2

Man, this is a tough question. well, It should not. But the laws of the world has said other wise. I mean if you look at the bible. The son of the first human, adam, killed his own brother who is from the same flesh an blood of the same father. But yet he had the guts to kill his own brother. If you believe in evolution the theory of the survial of the fitest is what governs the universe not just our species or just the little fishies in the sea. Violence is a part of us. However, laws, moral, and values make us humans diffrent from the rest of the species. These laws, morals and values also history illustrate to us the down fall of violence. violence of any kind creats more violence. Thus war also should not be premanent condition of humanity. I mean we are supposed to get smarter and learn from the past and civialize our selves. We can not call our selves civilized and repeat the same action of the ancient hihttes, the greeks, the romans, the mongols, or the nazis. We are humans have to figure out other means of solving our problems. I hope that in the centuries to come peace can be almost achieved. But i do not think that it will go away completly. Because the world is unting under the UN and the EU and the AU and other organizations. If people are unified under the same baner or flag, then people will feel comfortable with one another, people will view the world diffrently that way. instead I am this and that. we will look at our selves as citizens of the earth. I hope that will happen. But I do not belive that it will happen any time soon.

Answer 3

Should it be? No. Peace would ideally be our permanent condition. Will war be the permanent condition of humanity? Given our violent warring history, all signs point to yes...

Answer 4

I am not going to dance around in circles like Barbara to answer this question. My answer is war will always be with humanity as long as there is greed, hate, envy, prejudice, and injustice. The book "Another Thought" by OC Tross.

Answer 5

Doesn't matter if it should or should not be this way: point it, humans can't sit still long enough for peace. Ever told a kid to sit in one spot for a long period of time? Its sort of like that. It's all about wanting what the other guy has. When the other guy has what we want, we try and take it.

Answer 6

Rebellions against our war-like stasis would just be one more act of bellicosity against ourselves. Every action is the result of conflict, conflict "resolution", the pacification of opposing alternatives. Without opposition, life is rendered completely docile. I prescribe peace for everyone, but myself, it's much easier to control those who cannot control themselves.

Answer 7

Should it be? No. Is it, has it always been, will it always be? Yes.

Answer 8

Man has always battled, but it was only under the goading of the Illuminati that things have reached the sad point they are now.

Only three types of creatures engage in warfare: humans, chimpanzees, and ants.

Among humans, warfare is so ubiquitous and historically commonplace that we often attribute it to some innate predisposition for slaughter, perhaps a murderous hormone. The earliest archeological evidence of war is 12,000 years ago, well before capitalism and cities. This was at the very beginning of settled, agricultural life. Throughout history you will find warfare among hunter-gatherers, herding and farming peoples, industrial and even post-industrial societies, democracies, and dictatorships. The explanation of testosterone would seem to fit the facts.

But war is too complex and collective an activity to be accounted for by any warlike instinct lurking within the individual psyche. Battles, in which the violence occurs, are only one part of war, most of which consists of preparation for battle, training, the manufacture of weapons, the organization of supply lines, etc. There is no plausible instinct that could impel a man to leave home, cut his hair short, and drill for hours in tight formation.

Contrary to the biological theories of war, it is not easy to get men to fight. In recent centuries, men have often gone to great lengths to avoid war from fleeing their homelands, shooting off their index fingers, to feigning insanity. So unreliable was the rank and file of the famed eighteenth century Prussian army that military rules forbade camping near wooded areas: The troops would simply melt away into the trees. Even when men are duly assembled for battle, killing is not something that seems to come naturally to them. One of the great challenges of military training is to get soldiers to shoot directly at individual enemies.

What has made war such an inescapable part of the human experience? Each war appears to the participants to have an immediate purpose, to get Saddam or find imaginary WMDs, preserve or enforce democracy, or whatever that makes it palatable to the men fighting. They are taught that this is a noble and necessary endeavor. This is where state propaganda and media (as is done in the west today) becomes an art form.

But those who study war dispassionately, as a recurrent event with no moral content, have observed a certain mathematical pattern: that of "epidemicity," or the tendency of war to spread in the manner of an infectious disease. Obviously, war is not a symptom of disease or the work of microbes, but it does spread geographically in a disease-like manner, usually as groups take up warfare in response to war-like neighbors. It also spreads through time, as the losses suffered in one war call forth new wars of retaliation. Think of World War I, which breaks out for no good reason at all, draws in most of Europe as well as the United States, and then reproduces itself, after a couple of decades, as World War II. Of course I will not mention how the Illuminati has planned every war for the past centuries and always sowed seeds for the next one to come.

One of the causes of war is war itself. Wars produce war-like societies, which, in turn, make the world more dangerous for other societies, which are thus recruited into being war-prone themselves. Just as there is no gene for war, neither is there a single type or feature of society that generates it. War begets war and shapes human societies as it does so. This is how the Illuminati have planned it. They move us further along with every war, each leaving us closer to their insidious New World Order.

War shapes human societies by requiring that they possess two things: one, some group or class of men (and, in some historical settings, women) who are trained to fight; and, two, the resources to arm and feed them. These requirements have often been compatible with patriarchal cultures dominated by a warrior elite. Today you might consider the American government administration to fulfill this role. There is, after all, a fortune to be made in equipping, training, and then collecting the spoils of war.

Different ways of fighting lead to different forms of social and political organization. The phalanx formation used by the ancient Greeks, with its stress on equality and interdependence, was a factor favoring the emergence of democracy among nonslave Greek males. The gun-wielding armies that appeared in Europe in the seventeenth century contributed to the development of the modern nation-state if only as a bureaucratic apparatus to collect the taxes required to support these armies.

It is not only the "means of production" that shape societies, but the means of destruction. In our own time, the costs of war, or war-readiness, are larger than at any time in history, in relation to other human needs, due to the pressure on nations to maintain a mass standing army. The United States supports about a million men and women at arms although that number is currently fluctuating. They also have to keep up with an extremely expensive, ever-changing technology of killing.

The cost squeeze has led to a new type of society, perhaps best termed a "depleted" state, in which the military has drained resources from all other social functions. The United States is fast reaching that point although most Americans are too busy pointing fingers at politicians to see that this is happening. North Korea is a particularly ghoulish example, where starvation coexists with nuclear weapons development. The USSR crumbled under the weight of militarism. At this time, as the United States brandishes its military might around the world, they are cutting school lunches and health care for the poor. They are also ignoring the soldiers wounded in the war.

"Addiction" provides an imprecise analogy for our relationship to war; parasitism or predation is more to the point. However and whenever war began, it has persisted and propagated itself with the terrifying tenacity of a beast attached to the neck of living prey, feeding on human effort and blood.

If this is what we are up against, it won't do much good to try to uproot whatever war-like inclinations may dwell within our minds. Abjuring violent speech and imagery, critiquing masculinist culture, and promoting respect for human diversity are all worthy projects, but they make little contribution to the abolition of war. It would be far better to think of war as something external to ourselves, something which has to be uprooted, everywhere, down to the last weapon and bellicose pageant.

The "epidemicity" of war has one other clear implication: War cannot be used as a means to prevent or abolish war. True, for some time to come, urgent threats from other heavily armed states will require at least the threat of armed force in response. But these must be very urgent threats and extremely restrained responses. To indulge, one more time, in the metaphor of war as a kind of living thing, a parasite on human societies: The idea of a war to end war is one of its oldest, and cruelest, tricks.

War has also taken on another sinister aspect. Where once men fought face to face and there was a certain “etiquette”, that was lost when war became impersonal through use of long distance weapons. These weapons, also, leave behind residues that will harm us all for millions of years.

I dunno about you, but I don’t think this should be allowed to go on, do you?