3 ms·
> 3. Despite #2 its hard to ignore the more than tripling of events from 1900-2000 to 2000-2100 (and we are only 20 years in this century) Taking a brief look
by jcranmer 5y ago
> 3. Despite #2 its hard to ignore the more than tripling of events from 1900-2000 to 2000-2100 (and we are only 20 years in this century)
Taking a brief look at the data, it's almost certainly reporting bias. Most of the entries for "trigger" in 2019 are variations on the theme "man stabs neighbor [sometimes only maybe] because water." The sources for these are generally local news reports, which are far easier to find in 2019 than they are in the 20th century. Indeed, the first such listing I see is in... 1999.
In general, the quality of the curation of this debate doesn't inspire much confidence in me (the Lesotho coup, I noticed, is listed twice as well... how did that get missed?).
- Nasrudith 5y agoTo be frank the "water wars" seems suspiciously zeitgeist and "trope-driven" like Bloomberg's "backdoor chip" story. There is no need for them to add a separate chip when they are fabbing the damn thing. It seems far more "apocalyptic symbolism" than any remotely rational connection beyond "Step one: water instability. Step two: ??? Step Three: War!". It completely ignores all conflict resolution mechanisms, deals, and trades and just assumes foreordained war.
- jcranmer 5y agoI'd go a step further and also add that there seems to be a sentiment that everything needs to be explained as having water instability as the cause (or at least the predominant cause). Several entries in the list are basically "X happened for several reasons, including water." And worse, anything that involves water is included, even if it's not really about control of water for human use--the Fashoda incident is on the list, which is really about competing French and British colonial claims for their desire for a contiguous east/west or north/south (respectively) African empire.