4 ms·

Regarding your commend on energy, I think it is actually an argument on my point that fighting wars is going to be even more absurd. If the world is running sho

by aogaili 7mo ago

Regarding your commend on energy, I think it is actually an argument on my point that fighting wars is going to be even more absurd. If the world is running short of energy then fighting a war that further consumes energy without clear win will be viewed as absurd. If all wars will become a war of attrition between robots and economies, then fighting wars means no energy left for local economies to run across the globe. The future war will feel like bleeding, a leak in an already scarce system, you don't do water guns fight int the middle of the desert.

iamnothere 7mo ago
Yes, you are correct about the effects, much as the Sea Peoples destroyed multiple civilizations at the end of the Bronze Age and lowered the world’s overall level of development. Or how the Mongol conquests destroyed Mesopotamian irrigation networks and early organized Chinese societies. Or the Thirty Years’ War that devastated European civilizations. World Wars I and II would have had similar effects if it weren’t for rapid global technological advancement and industrialization at this time, which enabled more rapid recovery. Much of the cheapest energy has been extracted by now, so the next serious global war will reduce global carrying capacity. With all that entails.
- aogaili 7mo ago
  You don't think the absurdity of drone vs drone economic warfare coupled with the reduction in global energy will reduce the probability of future wars? I actually think it will. Because in the examples you gave, the world was not as connected. But look at what happening now, an economic bleed in one nation is impact the global economy in way that nobody even understands let alone predicts. You wage a war in Iran? alright, few weeks later people in Brazil can't have food because of shortage in fertilizer..US farmers increase prices by 40% because of the shortage, that causes riots in the US..we live in an extremely interconnected word and nothing short of a third global war would tear that system down. We had nothing like this in the past, not the tech, nor the economies and the information system, that allows us to see what is happening. The argument you are making is that it happened in the past with all these semi isolated empires therefore it would happen again. But the world we live is vastly different from the past. And I don't think your assertion hold into the future frankly, it is poorly defended.
  - iamnothere 7mo ago
    If you understood history well, you would know that the Bronze Age collapse was actually very similar to what is happening today. Bronze Age empires relied on the tin supply chain, with much of it produced in Afghanistan. The tin trade was enormous and profitable for all involved, but a series of constant disruptions caused the supply chain to break down, ending economical bronze production. The crisis was initiated by natural disasters and climate change, while The Sea Peoples, internal civil conflicts, and the dawn of chariot warfare were the final straws that unraveled the trade networks. The rulers of the various Bronze Age civilizations were in communication and were aware of what was happening, but they were unable to coordinate to stop it. You have too much confidence in people’s ability to identify a crisis across cultures and coordinate a collective response while accepting the often unequal costs that such a response would impose.
    - aogaili 7mo ago
      I think we reached the end of your arguments because we are repeating. As I said, I don't think this is the same as the past, not even close. You can't assume the same results from a very different preconditions, yet you keep doing this. The second point, you don't need to see far to understand, especially after this war with Iran, that the world economy is one organism, and you can't shoot the feet and hope to run happily by the other.
      - iamnothere 7mo ago
        It doesn’t matter that it is one organism, there are those who benefit from this arrangement and those who do not. Those who do not would often prefer to tear it down even at the cost of their own lives. This is human nature and cannot be changed. The increasing complexity of the supply chain comes with extreme fragility, and a series of cascading shocks could unravel it as in the Bronze Age. Over a sufficient time frame this is almost certain to occur. Regardless, I agree that we are done, I understand your perspective as I once believed as you do. Good luck, and hopefully you are correct, for everyone’s sake.
        7mo ago
kelnos 7mo ago
> If the world is running short of energy then fighting a war that further consumes energy without clear win will be viewed as absurd. I think you have an unrealistic view of the rationality of people who go to war for stuff like this.
- aogaili 7mo ago
  I actually have zero believe in the rationality of the leaders, you only need to listen to one speech to see the irrationality. However, systems don't care about people irrationality, it will force them to behave in certain ways. We are seeing things unfold in front of our eyes clearly pertaining to the global energy. Iran blocked the world supply forcing the global empire to retreat, it does't matter what Trump wants, at the end of the day, he is left with a dichotomy, either to escalate and further risk the global economy or retreat, and he had no option but to choose the later. He understood that destroying the world economy will be the end of his presidency and legacy. If the future is merely a war of economies and drones, my point is that it would be closer to a video games than wars of the past. And this is a good thing!

by aogaili 7mo ago

iamnothere 7mo ago

Yes, you are correct about the effects, much as the Sea Peoples destroyed multiple civilizations at the end of the Bronze Age and lowered the world’s overall level of development. Or how the Mongol conquests destroyed Mesopotamian irrigation networks and early organized Chinese societies. Or the Thirty Years’ War that devastated European civilizations. World Wars I and II would have had similar effects if it weren’t for rapid global technological advancement and industrialization at this time, which enabled more rapid recovery. Much of the cheapest energy has been extracted by now, so the next serious global war will reduce global carrying capacity. With all that entails.

aogaili 7mo ago
You don't think the absurdity of drone vs drone economic warfare coupled with the reduction in global energy will reduce the probability of future wars? I actually think it will. Because in the examples you gave, the world was not as connected. But look at what happening now, an economic bleed in one nation is impact the global economy in way that nobody even understands let alone predicts. You wage a war in Iran? alright, few weeks later people in Brazil can't have food because of shortage in fertilizer..US farmers increase prices by 40% because of the shortage, that causes riots in the US..we live in an extremely interconnected word and nothing short of a third global war would tear that system down. We had nothing like this in the past, not the tech, nor the economies and the information system, that allows us to see what is happening. The argument you are making is that it happened in the past with all these semi isolated empires therefore it would happen again. But the world we live is vastly different from the past. And I don't think your assertion hold into the future frankly, it is poorly defended.
- iamnothere 7mo ago
  If you understood history well, you would know that the Bronze Age collapse was actually very similar to what is happening today. Bronze Age empires relied on the tin supply chain, with much of it produced in Afghanistan. The tin trade was enormous and profitable for all involved, but a series of constant disruptions caused the supply chain to break down, ending economical bronze production. The crisis was initiated by natural disasters and climate change, while The Sea Peoples, internal civil conflicts, and the dawn of chariot warfare were the final straws that unraveled the trade networks. The rulers of the various Bronze Age civilizations were in communication and were aware of what was happening, but they were unable to coordinate to stop it. You have too much confidence in people’s ability to identify a crisis across cultures and coordinate a collective response while accepting the often unequal costs that such a response would impose.
  - aogaili 7mo ago
    I think we reached the end of your arguments because we are repeating. As I said, I don't think this is the same as the past, not even close. You can't assume the same results from a very different preconditions, yet you keep doing this. The second point, you don't need to see far to understand, especially after this war with Iran, that the world economy is one organism, and you can't shoot the feet and hope to run happily by the other.
    - iamnothere 7mo ago
      It doesn’t matter that it is one organism, there are those who benefit from this arrangement and those who do not. Those who do not would often prefer to tear it down even at the cost of their own lives. This is human nature and cannot be changed. The increasing complexity of the supply chain comes with extreme fragility, and a series of cascading shocks could unravel it as in the Bronze Age. Over a sufficient time frame this is almost certain to occur. Regardless, I agree that we are done, I understand your perspective as I once believed as you do. Good luck, and hopefully you are correct, for everyone’s sake.
      - 7mo ago

kelnos 7mo ago

> If the world is running short of energy then fighting a war that further consumes energy without clear win will be viewed as absurd. I think you have an unrealistic view of the rationality of people who go to war for stuff like this.

aogaili 7mo ago
I actually have zero believe in the rationality of the leaders, you only need to listen to one speech to see the irrationality. However, systems don't care about people irrationality, it will force them to behave in certain ways. We are seeing things unfold in front of our eyes clearly pertaining to the global energy. Iran blocked the world supply forcing the global empire to retreat, it does't matter what Trump wants, at the end of the day, he is left with a dichotomy, either to escalate and further risk the global economy or retreat, and he had no option but to choose the later. He understood that destroying the world economy will be the end of his presidency and legacy. If the future is merely a war of economies and drones, my point is that it would be closer to a video games than wars of the past. And this is a good thing!