WARS!?!?!?!?!

[Cuchulainn]

War is merely the continuation of foreign policy by other means - Karl von Clausewitz

[Cloud No.9]

oooooh time for a 1984 reference.

wars keep the working class in line. it works like this. if wars didn't exist all those people builind nice big aircraft-carriers, abrhams tanks and b-2 bombers might be building nice stuff like cargo ships, making food and general useful stuff (also all the taxes could go into education too).

then people would become richer (things would be more plentiful and cheaper). thus they could afford more of what they couldn't before. allowing them to concentrate more on education and thus become literate. literate people then tend to think more about stuff including the situation they are in. they would then see they are quite a crap state of affirs and start to change things. that would not be good for the ruling elite who create the wars. so creating wars keeps power.

it was true when the machine was invented. the proles all of a sudden had lots of free time to learn because machines did all the hard work. and so we had all those lovely revolutions.

not my theory, goldstein's in 1984. it is of course a lot more detailed than i said but it will do.

[ShunNakamura]

That is a nice connection there. Though I don't think it is any where the only reason. And if it is even a reason it is likely subconcious.. I don't know if some rulers would be smart enough to obtain such a connection(course I may be off base thier).

I still like the connection though. Very good read, and very deep.

[DHEvil]

What is the POINT in war? And who ever said people had to get killed during war? Why can't we use paintguns or somehing?

Or maybe if countries have a disagreement they could flip a coin to see who wins!

OR! *Shock* They could actually try to communicate with each other and ACTUALLY solve the problem through ACTUAL diplomacy! Although that's impossible for countries nowadays. They always have to kill each other *Sighs*

[Yamaneko]

This is actually a very old concept. Robert Malthus, an English economist, first proposed the idea in 1798. He believed that the population of the world was growing too fast and that there were not enough resources to support this growing population. He claimed that there were various solutions to this problem, one of these being war. War would see people die and in turn we would see a decrease in the population. However, almost a century later we see Karl Marx propose his idea of communism where he states that it is not a lack of resources which puts a strain on the population of the world, but rather mismanagement of resources. According to Marx there is no such thing as a trickle-down theory, and thus it is the job of the working class to distribute resources among the growing population.

In the decades following the works of these two men we've seen that Malthus' theory that war is a check on overpopulation doesn't hold true. The bigger the population the more people you put into primary and secondary jobs. With the help of technological innovations, we've actually seen a decrease in primary jobs and movement into urban areas. The problem, indeed, does look to be mismanagement. As the nations of the first world become wealthier, the larger the gap becomes between the first and third world nations. And there lies the problem of resource mismanagement.

And as for the statement about the good uses of war, I believe that there is no good in war. War is a part of our reality, and something we must undertake during certain times to accomplish something else. War might lead to something good, but in itself war is not "good".

[nik0tine]

Very well said Yams. I couldn't agree with you more.

What is the POINT in war? And who ever said people had to get killed during war? Why can't we use paintguns or somehing?

Without suffering, nobody would be willing to give up.

[DHEvil]

Ah, but you see suffering doesn't.....er.....SHOULDN'T be a part of governmental affairs.

[nik0tine]

Ah, but you see suffering doesn't.....er.....SHOULDN'T be a part of governmental affairs.

So when the people are starving, thier suffering shouldn't be taken into consideration?

[DHEvil]

Now you're just twisting it.

[Cuchulainn]

This is actually a very old concept. Robert Malthus, an English economist, first proposed the idea in 1798. He believed that the population of the world was growing too fast and that there were not enough resources to support this growing population. He claimed that there were various solutions to this problem, one of these being war. War would see people die and in turn we would see a decrease in the population. However, almost a century later we see Karl Marx propose his idea of communism where he states that it is not a lack of resources which puts a strain on the population of the world, but rather mismanagement of resources. According to Marx there is no such thing as a trickle-down theory, and thus it is the job of the working class to distribute resources among the growing population.

In the decades following the works of these two men we've seen that Malthus' theory that war is a check on overpopulation doesn't hold true. The bigger the population the more people you put into primary and secondary jobs. With the help of technological innovations, we've actually seen a decrease in primary jobs and movement into urban areas. The problem, indeed, does look to be mismanagement. As the nations of the first world become wealthier, the larger the gap becomes between the first and third world nations. And there lies the problem of resource mismanagement.

And as for the statement about the good uses of war, I believe that there is no good in war. War is a part of our reality, and something we must undertake during certain times to accomplish something else. War might lead to something good, but in itself war is not "good".

One of the best posts I've ever seen here.

[Trumpet Thief]

chaos: Overpopulation?

Rubedo: There is enough space in the world for everyone on Earth to stand side by side on the island of Jamaica.

[edczxcvbnm]

I would like to point out that only 1 time in known history has there been a backwards trend in population growth and that was the black plauge. Everything else has only slowed it down but never sent it backwards.

[Ultima Shadow]

Well... pretty all that needs to be said have already been said by nik0tine and Yams... and I agree.

However... as for good things about war... well... even though most people probably don't notice it, there's a lot of entertainment that's based on war. Touching war-based movies, war-based video games, books, a lot of good stories, war toys and martial art etc. Nothing of these would ever have existed if war never had existed. It's actually pretty weird... that such a horrible thing as war have resulted in many ways to enjoy yourself. However... the sacrifices made far outweight all these kinds of entertainments. Still... the fact that people enjoy to reading about, watching and playing war remains. There's more that's orginally based on war than you think.

Overrall, war sux big time, though. War creates far too much hate, suffering and sorrow to ever be considered something good by me. And the reason war occurs is ALMOST always because of stupid, greedy and powerhungry idiots and their politic obsession.

Another problem, of course, is that there's people who makes a whole lot of money on making weapons. I'm sure they never even think about that they actually are creating things with only 1 purpose: "killing other humans". The weapon industry is 1 of the biggest industries in the world. If I recall correctly, it's the weapon and porn industry that's the 2 biggest in the world. With other words: sex and violence. That's actually pretty crazy...

Gah... I hope something of what I said actually made sense.

[Doomie]

There was also that guy who said War was good for the economy, which isn't entirely false.

[lordblazer]

I would like to point out that only 1 time in known history has there been a backwards trend in population growth and that was the black plauge. Everything else has only slowed it down but never sent it backwards.

and that really was jsut in Europe and I'm not of european descent.There have been other cases of population going backwards.
In Europe the black plague was one of them.The thing is European women hips weren't large enough to safely give birth.In England back then women would jsut die during birth and most times ther ekids with there.THey were literally splitting during child birth.What helped eased the population decline in europe was the new concept of having sex with someone without having to be married.That was one hting htat actually helped slow down the decline in population.But those who survived the black plague in europe tehre descents have also been shown to have an immunity towards aids.Its a weird bloodline some people have yet genectics is too weird anyway.


back to war...............