If you only knew how bad it really was.

It's largely stupidity, ego, and paranoia that cause most wars in history, and I'm not talking about the Great War or World War II, though there was plenty of stupidity in, and immediately after those. Recommended reading list is hard to put together, as many of the books are memory-holed, or have been rewritten to obfuscate their original intent. Ironic that we live in the information age, yet it is all too easy to hide and delete information. I recommend reading about the history of China, specifically its wars and "revolutions" over the past thousand years. There are trends and patterns that are rather revealing. If you'd like to get into more western-focused stuff, look into the history before the crusades, and work upward from there. It's indeed a lot to take in, and be advised that the majority of what information you can find has been whitewashed with specific intent.

When you line up the potential adversaries and the possible flashpoints, it does look rather depressing.
Russia taking what they can get away with, will they push it too far?
China … would they need a war, they buy their way into critical industries, and sell tons of cheap tech, they just have to keep going and they'll own everything.
Islamic fundamentalism vs. the west.
North Korea - remains to be seen if it's real progress, or just taking advantage.

Maybe for some of the possible flashpoints, the allies of both sides must meet and agree that they will both keep out of it

here we go again 😀)))))

so both of you state the same - lack of humility is evil and ego leads to wars - can you even justify this?

There hasn't been a world war since nukes were demonstrated in WW2. There is a reason for that.

I'm no expert and there are likely numerous reasons but chief among them would be tribalism which results in misunderstanding and lack of communication.
There is no "evil" except that which is defined by each tribe.

Lack of a proper upbringing and the limitations of humans are the culprits.

Parents are very bad at raising their children properly so comprehensive training from childhood to adulthood would be required. (Would never happen humans are too cheap, not objective, lazy)

I think the only solution is an objective party like an AI that governs everyone but everyone would have a vote on what is "good" or "evil" for how every aspect of society is governed. Figure out a way for enough energy, food, air, water, jobs, etc for all and there isn't much left for humans to be petty about but I'm sure they would be anyway.

Obviously the above would never happen since it would be seen as "evil". Likely the best bet would be on another planet where this would be necessary for starting and sustaining a colony.

2018 is a heck of a lot better than 1018 but it's still pretty sad how primitive and limited we are.

DosFreak wrote:

2018 is a heck of a lot better than 1018 but it's still pretty sad how primitive and limited we are.

Well, as a Christian, I would tell you that that's just human nature and there's actually no way to fix it from within; it must be fixed from without. But of course we must continue to strive for better things in the meantime 😉

Unfortunately humanity has been stuck in a loop of sorts for so long no one really knows for how long but sadly it is right to point out that human nature is pretty rotten for wars to happen in the first place. There are plenty of answers some of which are very logical while the deeper truths are off on the deep end but people being people such is often not excepted. Won't be the first time an advanced civilization blew itself into oblivion on this world but hopefully it will be the last and whatever replaces it is a balanced once.

keenmaster486 wrote:

If everyone would keep to themselves, we would not have these issues.

Nonsense, we need to continue the trend of building a global economy and homogenising our cultures so that there's more "us" than "them". This is the process responcible for what has been a very peacful period in our history (relatively speaking) and although it will falter from time-to-time, it's the logical conclusion to what humanity has been doing for thousands of years, i.e. building bridges b/w tribes via a shared economy and eventually just merging into one big tribe.

I think it may be impossible for humanity to get to the point when we “merge into one big tribe.” We’re just too tribalistic and diverse in our thinking, and there is way too much of people wanting to control other people. The only thing that has “worked” so far is the United Nations which everyone only agreed to because it doesn’t have any actual power, only influence.

The United States alone barely works as it is with so much division among us and between the various states.

It’s also a bad idea to force the issue, for example if we instituted a world government right now it would quickly fall apart and the world would split again.

This is one of the reasons large empires eventually fall. Also, the larger the government, the more bloated it becomes, and the more corrupt, as there is more opportunity for corruption.

Damn, humanity is just too evil! We have to place the strictest limits on our governments to keep them from putting people in gulags, and terrible punishments for our people to keep them from murdering, thieving, embezzling, raping, you name it. Give people the freedom to do whatever they want with no limits (the purge) and they will quickly devolve into monsters.

This is also the only reason capitalism has worked, because it places a negative incentive on screwing people over, as long as there’s another guy across the street who won’t.

Most of the talk above is about "how and why common joe goes to fighting a war by thinking he is fighting for a just war". Egos, tribalism, cultural differences, etc... all of those are inconsequential, irrelevant. Wars are not about the common joe, they are about the direction of flow of added value, about changing that direction of flow of the riches. Or for not allowing the direction to change, for that matter.

Everything else is blah blah... So, there will be wars for ever, just as there always been wars.

yes, let's wage a war on retro hardware prices!

badmojo wrote:

Nonsense, we need to continue the trend of building a global economy and homogenising our cultures so that there's more "us" than "them". This is the process responcible for what has been a very peacful period in our history (relatively speaking) and although it will falter from time-to-time, it's the logical conclusion to what humanity has been doing for thousands of years, i.e. building bridges b/w tribes via a shared economy and eventually just merging into one big tribe.

Wherever such attempts were actually made, they were what caused the worst conflicts. Yugoslavia, Iraq, USSR, past and present Western and counter-Western colonialism, etc. It'll work for a time if you're willing to impose increasingly coercive and tyrannical measures to enforce them - which increasingly seems to be the thing to do in our 'enlightened' days, too - but there always comes an end to that, and then it tends to get rather ugly.

Culture and identity are too central to human civilization to 'homogenize' (read: erase). All proposed alternatives so far are completely superficial and do not work as replacements. But culture/identity are not the problem; the problem is usually those notions that seek to ignore/suppress/erase them.

keenmaster486 wrote:

I think specifically everyone here in the West who has worked so hard to build the current model of peace and prosperity after World War II, with the United Nations, NATO, trade agreements, international cooperation, etc. etc.

If ordinary people in Europe would start a war, then it would be a war against the undemocratic non-elected institutions like the UN, EU commission, ECB, IMF and such, that are completely draining average Joe from all his money for the last 25 years or so.

tayyare wrote:

Most of the talk above is about "how and why common joe goes to fighting a war by thinking he is fighting for a just war". Egos, tribalism, cultural differences, etc... all of those are inconsequential, irrelevant. Wars are not about the common joe, they are about the direction of flow of added value, about changing that direction of flow of the riches. Or for not allowing the direction to change, for that matter.

Everything else is blah blah... So, there will be wars for ever, just as there always been wars.

You are absolutely right, wars will be held to redistribute wealth, assets, everyone (especially the elites) wants a bigger piece of the pie, but if average Joe doesn't get his piece without consultation, then he sure will fight for it.

badmojo wrote:

keenmaster486 wrote:

If everyone would keep to themselves, we would not have these issues.

Nonsense, we need to continue the trend of building a global economy and homogenising our cultures so that there's more "us" than "them". This is the process responcible for what has been a very peacful period in our history (relatively speaking) and although it will falter from time-to-time, it's the logical conclusion to what humanity has been doing for thousands of years, i.e. building bridges b/w tribes via a shared economy and eventually just merging into one big tribe.

I'm not sure if "homogenize" is the word.

We're all like different flavors of milk, but we need to focus on the fact that we're all milk, not that one is plain, another is chocolate, another is strawberry, etc.

gdjacobs wrote:

We're all like different flavors of milk, but we need to focus on the fact that we're all milk, not that one is plain, another is chocolate, another is strawberry, etc.

Here's where that gets tricky:

You believe that. I also believe that. Probably everyone here believes that. But there will always be people who don't believe that, and don't want to believe that. In order to create a global society, everyone has to have a global mindset. The only way to achieve that is by coercion of thought, which runs contrary to the principles of a free society.

gdjacobs wrote:

I'm not sure if "homogenize" is the word.

Lolz, how about "standardise" instead? Without a common understanding and value system then fighting something like climate change is impossible, so yes we're all milk and there's so much of us that we're now collectively able to destroy a planet, so we gotta all get onto the same page for the greater good.

"Standardize" - i.e., you want everyone to think the same way!

It doesn't matter if that way is the best way or not. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that it is. You would still be infringing upon people's basic freedom by forcing them to think differently from how they want to, by either killing them or "re-educating" them.

I think this is impossible without committing horrible atrocities a la Soviet Union.

keenmaster486 wrote:

gdjacobs wrote:

We're all like different flavors of milk, but we need to focus on the fact that we're all milk, not that one is plain, another is chocolate, another is strawberry, etc.

Here's where that gets tricky:

You believe that. I also believe that. Probably everyone here believes that. But there will always be people who don't believe that, and don't want to believe that. In order to create a global society, everyone has to have a global mindset. The only way to achieve that is by coercion of thought, which runs contrary to the principles of a free society.

Yes, however, the parameters of that global mindset can be fairly loose. Also, freedom of thought is fine. You're free to believe those that drink strawberry milk are a scourge upon the world, but your freedom doesn't extend to forcibly eradicating them or otherwise impinging on their freedoms as provided by society. Any who believe otherwise will test the strength of law and, hopefully, find themselves on the losing side.