3 ms·
I get it, but disagree. WW I and WW II is was both a lot more than a bit of misinformation. And by ops definition, we've been fighting a war ever since we inven
by roesel 9y ago
I get it, but disagree. WW I and WW II is was both a lot more than a bit of misinformation. And by ops definition, we've been fighting a war ever since we invented language and the ability to lie and make up reasoning. A very sensationalist headline.
- prmph 9y agoI think you miss the point. The article is not saying every war is about mis-information; it is saying every war is the inevitable culmination of a techno-social shift that begin long before the war itself. So different wars have resulted from different shifts. In this view, WW1 resulted from advances in gun and related technologies; WW2 from further advances in war technology and the collapse of the old order wrought by WW1, and WW3 will result (and indeed has began) from the loss of meaning and mis-information resulting from the misuse of current information technology.