4 ms·

>You only stop war by having the best technology and by scaring the bejabers — I’m trying to be nice here — out of our adversaries. That's haunting indeed to t

>You only stop war by having the best technology and by scaring the bejabers — I’m trying to be nice here — out of our adversaries. That's haunting indeed to the naive minds who imagine the world must run on political correctness, rainbows and unicorns, but that's not how the real world works or has ever worked, and nobody can say that he's wrong though just because he's not sugar coating it. You only have peace if everyone is scared of you. Why do only small guys get bullied and not the tall muscular jocks? Why does Russia bully the EU and not the US? Being pacifist doesn't assure you any peace if you're weak, as eventually, inevitably, someone hungry and greedy will build their strength to come for your lunch and you'll have to defend it if you want to keep it, as per human history in the last infinity years. Ask Belgium or NL how their pacifism worked out in WW2 in face of the Nazi army. He should have just said: "Better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener in a war" if he wanted something that sounds nicer.

whazor 1y ago
When trust is high, crime and corruption are low. Do you increase trust by making people scared? How can we increase trust? Both internationally, but also nationally?
- breppp 1y ago
  That does not work with ideologies that see war as natural or good, as in the example you replied to it's naive to think that the wars of the 20th century were caused by lack of trust, or the 21st
- porridgeraisin 1y ago
  That's only been observed for small, close knit communities (regardless of race etc before the pitchfork activists come out). You're never ever getting that for the whole world. Some things (not all) are just a conflict of interest. There's no solution except one with a winner and a loser.
- raverbashing 1y ago
  You know, you increase trust also by arresting actual criminals So when the police is happy to fine you for any technicality while people are free to do drugs on the streets (due to bad policy) this brings trust down - like in SF
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  On a scale, how much do you trust your fellow countrymen from the bad parts of town not to rob you? Then how much do you trust your politicians not to lie to you? Then how much do you trust other countries' politicians not to invade you? There's your answer right there. Trust only works locally throughout family and closely knit communities, but globally trust is like fiat currency, on a large global scale it is completely worthless on its own, without any higher form of enforcement through violent means to defend and enforce the relationship where the winner dictates the conditions and everyone else has to follow. Countries don't trust the US government, but they trust and use the USD because they trust the US will do everything militarily to protect it. That's as far as trust goes.
saubeidl 1y ago
This paranoid attitude leads to an arms race that will destroy liberty for everyone. The Chinese are just preventing terrorism in Xinjiang, right? And the Russians are just scared of NATO expansionism. This fake fear is the veiled language of conquest.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  >This paranoid attitude leads to an arms race that will destroy liberty for everyone. You are free to give up your arms first in a race for world peace. Lead by example. Now do you think US, China and Russia will then follow you or will they just say thank you while they take your lunch and let you starve? >This fake fear is the veiled language of conquest. The fear isn't fake because the conquest isn't fake either. The entire societies, borders and economies we live in today have been agreed upon through violent conquest and you need to be capable of violence to defend or change them. Humans are greedy, tribal creatures, and conquest has been at the core of human behavior since time immemorial, and it's not going away just because you want to be a hippy.
  - skeezyboy 1y ago
    it would be a good argument if America didnt claim to be a moral beacon. Dont forget, nagasaki and hiroshima were bombs dropped on women and children. You might be able to convince me that women were part of the Japanese war effort, but theres no reason ill accept for nuking children. Why does no American ever feel shame about cooking a few hundred thousand civilians alive?
  - westpfelia 1y ago
    So America should invade Canada and Greenland to Anex them?
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    So what is the west even fighting for if it requires building a dystopian surveillance apparatus? Clearly its not for liberty or human rights, so at that point why should the population even support it?
nahumfarchi 1y ago
I don't get HN anymore. This comment reflects a legitimate stance that's articulated just fine. Why is it grayed out?
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  [flagged]
bootsmann 1y ago
> You only have peace if everyone is scared of you. How does your theory explain the 30 European nations that have been at peace with each other for decades? Is Poland simply too afraid of Lithuania due to Lithuanias military supremacy? Does France not invade the Netherlands because the Dutch army can field so many tanks?
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  >How does your theory explain the 30 European nations that have been at peace with each other for decades? How much of a percentage is those decades of peace out of the 200k year existence of the entire human race that has been defined only by war and conquest? You're cherry-picking the one exception the proves the rule. Secondly, peace amongst EU countries was due to the US world nuclear power having established occupation of Europe after WW2, and then EU countries have allied together not out of fondness for one another (which doesn't exist even today), but out out necessity of survival, since that was the only way they could stand up to USSR threat. The enemy of my enemy is my friend basically. Thirdly, conquest is at the core of EU too, except it's bureaucratic, political and economical, not military. Just because you don't see bullets being fired, doesn't mean the spoils of the economic pie doesn't get split up between victors.
  - bootsmann 1y ago
    > How much of a percentage is those decades of peace out of the 200k year entire existence of the human race that has been defined only by war? This makes the peace they enjoy even more impressive, no? > And secondly, EU countries have allied together not out of fondness for one another (which doesn't exist even today), but out out necessity of survival, since that was the only way they could stand up to bullying from US, Russia and China. This is so inaccurate it would take an article long comment to refute. Maybe you should avoid explaining the history of places to others online if you clearly do not live in them. > Thirdly, conquest is at the core of EU too, except it's bureaucratic, political and economical, not military. This is why sovereign countries join the EU by their own volition, clearly!
    - 1y ago

whazor 1y ago

When trust is high, crime and corruption are low. Do you increase trust by making people scared? How can we increase trust? Both internationally, but also nationally?

breppp 1y ago
That does not work with ideologies that see war as natural or good, as in the example you replied to it's naive to think that the wars of the 20th century were caused by lack of trust, or the 21st
porridgeraisin 1y ago
That's only been observed for small, close knit communities (regardless of race etc before the pitchfork activists come out). You're never ever getting that for the whole world. Some things (not all) are just a conflict of interest. There's no solution except one with a winner and a loser.
raverbashing 1y ago
You know, you increase trust also by arresting actual criminals So when the police is happy to fine you for any technicality while people are free to do drugs on the streets (due to bad policy) this brings trust down - like in SF
FirmwareBurner 1y ago
On a scale, how much do you trust your fellow countrymen from the bad parts of town not to rob you? Then how much do you trust your politicians not to lie to you? Then how much do you trust other countries' politicians not to invade you? There's your answer right there. Trust only works locally throughout family and closely knit communities, but globally trust is like fiat currency, on a large global scale it is completely worthless on its own, without any higher form of enforcement through violent means to defend and enforce the relationship where the winner dictates the conditions and everyone else has to follow. Countries don't trust the US government, but they trust and use the USD because they trust the US will do everything militarily to protect it. That's as far as trust goes.

saubeidl 1y ago

This paranoid attitude leads to an arms race that will destroy liberty for everyone. The Chinese are just preventing terrorism in Xinjiang, right? And the Russians are just scared of NATO expansionism. This fake fear is the veiled language of conquest.

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>This paranoid attitude leads to an arms race that will destroy liberty for everyone. You are free to give up your arms first in a race for world peace. Lead by example. Now do you think US, China and Russia will then follow you or will they just say thank you while they take your lunch and let you starve? >This fake fear is the veiled language of conquest. The fear isn't fake because the conquest isn't fake either. The entire societies, borders and economies we live in today have been agreed upon through violent conquest and you need to be capable of violence to defend or change them. Humans are greedy, tribal creatures, and conquest has been at the core of human behavior since time immemorial, and it's not going away just because you want to be a hippy.
- skeezyboy 1y ago
  it would be a good argument if America didnt claim to be a moral beacon. Dont forget, nagasaki and hiroshima were bombs dropped on women and children. You might be able to convince me that women were part of the Japanese war effort, but theres no reason ill accept for nuking children. Why does no American ever feel shame about cooking a few hundred thousand civilians alive?
- westpfelia 1y ago
  So America should invade Canada and Greenland to Anex them?
- saubeidl 1y ago
  So what is the west even fighting for if it requires building a dystopian surveillance apparatus? Clearly its not for liberty or human rights, so at that point why should the population even support it?

nahumfarchi 1y ago

I don't get HN anymore. This comment reflects a legitimate stance that's articulated just fine. Why is it grayed out?

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
[flagged]

bootsmann 1y ago

> You only have peace if everyone is scared of you. How does your theory explain the 30 European nations that have been at peace with each other for decades? Is Poland simply too afraid of Lithuania due to Lithuanias military supremacy? Does France not invade the Netherlands because the Dutch army can field so many tanks?

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>How does your theory explain the 30 European nations that have been at peace with each other for decades? How much of a percentage is those decades of peace out of the 200k year existence of the entire human race that has been defined only by war and conquest? You're cherry-picking the one exception the proves the rule. Secondly, peace amongst EU countries was due to the US world nuclear power having established occupation of Europe after WW2, and then EU countries have allied together not out of fondness for one another (which doesn't exist even today), but out out necessity of survival, since that was the only way they could stand up to USSR threat. The enemy of my enemy is my friend basically. Thirdly, conquest is at the core of EU too, except it's bureaucratic, political and economical, not military. Just because you don't see bullets being fired, doesn't mean the spoils of the economic pie doesn't get split up between victors.
- bootsmann 1y ago
  > How much of a percentage is those decades of peace out of the 200k year entire existence of the human race that has been defined only by war? This makes the peace they enjoy even more impressive, no? > And secondly, EU countries have allied together not out of fondness for one another (which doesn't exist even today), but out out necessity of survival, since that was the only way they could stand up to bullying from US, Russia and China. This is so inaccurate it would take an article long comment to refute. Maybe you should avoid explaining the history of places to others online if you clearly do not live in them. > Thirdly, conquest is at the core of EU too, except it's bureaucratic, political and economical, not military. This is why sovereign countries join the EU by their own volition, clearly!
  - 1y ago