4 ms·

No, in my opinion, we need to start working so that wars don't even make sense. A concept of the distant past. A future in which our descendants don't even know

No, in my opinion, we need to start working so that wars don't even make sense. A concept of the distant past. A future in which our descendants don't even know what wars are. In my vision there are no legitimate reasons for wars to exist at all. Of course this concept will sound alien and completely nuts for the majority, who are still in the fear based mindset; But then you can ask: So how do we protect ourselves from those that are attacking us ? The day we can answer this question without violence in the mindset is the day we evolve as humanity;

jcranmer 7y ago
Because that turned out so well when we tried it 100 years ago. Instead, we got WW2, the most destructive war in history in absolute terms.
- rafaelvasco 7y ago
  The problem is that humanity in general is still in a mindset which facilitates conflict, destruction, killings etc;
- imglorp 7y ago
  No, we tried isolationism before WW2, different from GP is asking for.
  - jcranmer 7y ago
    The "we" here is not the US government but the wider anti-war movements that helped push for such acts as the League of Nations and the Washington and London Treaties.
  - isoskeles 7y ago
    Britain didn’t try isolationism.
  - rafaelvasco 7y ago
    Yeah, isolationism absolutely isn't the way; Quite the contrary;
NotAnEconomist 7y ago
So, you don't actually know how either. It's trite and cheap to demand change you don't know how to do.
brnt 7y ago
That discussion is pointless without a definition of war. If you read some of what Moscovite thinktanks/ideologists produce, you'll find very little about guns and arms, but a lot on psychology and influencing. War to them is total war. There is no difference. Everything can be weaponized and will be used. There is no choice. Changing that line of thinking is first very different from western lines of thinking. Second, I'd say peace-movements in such environs have yet to take root, let alone produce the progress the West has seen since Vietnam.
- ephemeralism 7y ago
  Any examples?
  - brnt 7y ago
    Of?
Gpetrium 7y ago
To achieve your goal, you will need to change the very fundamental fabric of humanity and the reality of resource scarcity. Here are some examples that can lead to war: economic gain,territorial gain, religion, nationalism, revenge, civil strife, defensive. Below are a few expressions of what it can look like: * Actor A burned your crops -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor B disrupted your servers causing economic losses -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor C stole your technology and sold it to everyone by a fraction of your price -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor D manipulated a group within your nation to cause internal conflict -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor E invaded your land and claimed as their -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor F used their position of power to gain concessions from you -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor G defamed you, leading to society admonishing you and potentially imprisonment -> Do nothing (appeasement) Each Actor can be seen as both individuals or nations that are in existence today. Every one has their own set of interests and rationale for acting in certain ways.
- rafaelvasco 7y ago
  Yeah absolutely. It will happen. In time. But not now. What you think as the fundamental fabric of humanity is but a stage. We will overcome it. Unfortunately until we get there, much suffering will still ensue.
  - repolfx 7y ago
    Do you have any justification for this belief that war is just a stage that humanity will get over? There has always been war. There will always be people who think it's their destiny to rule over you, that you'll really be much happier if you're conquered, and if you don't meekly comply then maybe you just need to be ... liberated. For as long as some people think they're better than others, there will be wars, and I don't see people not thinking that any time soon, do you?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

jcranmer 7y ago

Because that turned out so well when we tried it 100 years ago. Instead, we got WW2, the most destructive war in history in absolute terms.

rafaelvasco 7y ago
The problem is that humanity in general is still in a mindset which facilitates conflict, destruction, killings etc;
imglorp 7y ago
No, we tried isolationism before WW2, different from GP is asking for.
- jcranmer 7y ago
  The "we" here is not the US government but the wider anti-war movements that helped push for such acts as the League of Nations and the Washington and London Treaties.
- isoskeles 7y ago
  Britain didn’t try isolationism.
- rafaelvasco 7y ago
  Yeah, isolationism absolutely isn't the way; Quite the contrary;

NotAnEconomist 7y ago

So, you don't actually know how either. It's trite and cheap to demand change you don't know how to do.

brnt 7y ago

That discussion is pointless without a definition of war. If you read some of what Moscovite thinktanks/ideologists produce, you'll find very little about guns and arms, but a lot on psychology and influencing. War to them is total war. There is no difference. Everything can be weaponized and will be used. There is no choice. Changing that line of thinking is first very different from western lines of thinking. Second, I'd say peace-movements in such environs have yet to take root, let alone produce the progress the West has seen since Vietnam.

ephemeralism 7y ago
Any examples?
- brnt 7y ago
  Of?

Gpetrium 7y ago

To achieve your goal, you will need to change the very fundamental fabric of humanity and the reality of resource scarcity. Here are some examples that can lead to war: economic gain,territorial gain, religion, nationalism, revenge, civil strife, defensive. Below are a few expressions of what it can look like: * Actor A burned your crops -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor B disrupted your servers causing economic losses -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor C stole your technology and sold it to everyone by a fraction of your price -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor D manipulated a group within your nation to cause internal conflict -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor E invaded your land and claimed as their -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor F used their position of power to gain concessions from you -> Do nothing (appeasement) * Actor G defamed you, leading to society admonishing you and potentially imprisonment -> Do nothing (appeasement) Each Actor can be seen as both individuals or nations that are in existence today. Every one has their own set of interests and rationale for acting in certain ways.

rafaelvasco 7y ago
Yeah absolutely. It will happen. In time. But not now. What you think as the fundamental fabric of humanity is but a stage. We will overcome it. Unfortunately until we get there, much suffering will still ensue.
- repolfx 7y ago
  Do you have any justification for this belief that war is just a stage that humanity will get over? There has always been war. There will always be people who think it's their destiny to rule over you, that you'll really be much happier if you're conquered, and if you don't meekly comply then maybe you just need to be ... liberated. For as long as some people think they're better than others, there will be wars, and I don't see people not thinking that any time soon, do you?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]