-
Pray and Grow Rich
May 16, 2013 | 68 comments
-
Ruthie’s Way
May 2, 2013 | 6 comments
-
A Free and Indivisible Union
April 25, 2013 | 70 comments
-
Revoke Obama’s Peace Prize
April 18, 2013 | 80 comments
-
What the New Atheists Ignore
April 11, 2013 | 103 comments
Latte Nation
War’s End?
Scientists are wrong to think war may be a thing of the past.
I have ceased to count the number of times I’ve heard self-proclaimed experts say the 20th century, with its multitudinous (yes, they like words like multitudinous) genocides, holocausts and world wars, was the bloodiest, most violent century ever.
Those who have bothered to study the subject know fewer than 3 percent of last century’s global population succumbed to war, far fewer than in centuries past when man battled with catapults and clubs, rather than incendiary bombs and tanks. Lawrence Keeley, author of War Before Civilization, notes that had the wars of the 20th century killed the same proportion of the population that died in typical tribal wars, there would have been two billion deaths, not 100 million. Meanwhile experimental psychologist Steve Pinker has observed that violence in general is on the decline, noting that today’s homicide rates in Europe are more than 10 times lower than in the Middle Ages. “[W]e are probably living in the most peaceful moment of our species time on earth,” he writes. A cause to celebrate, unless you are a hippie intellectual whose only purpose in life is to demonize civilization, the West and the scary Military Industrial Complex. Says Pinker: “No one ever attracted followers and donations by announcing that things keep getting better.”
It is generally the latter who continue to maintain that before civilized society there were no warriors and thus few tribal wars, just happy-go-lucky, vegan flower children traipsing through the meadows after sacrificing virgins. It wasn’t until some evil conservative came up with the idea to create culture and civilization and poetry and music and art that everything went to hell.
Not to fear. We may soon return to our pre-societal folkways, according to story in the new New Scientist. “A growing number of experts are now arguing that the urge to wage war is not innate, and that humanity is already moving in a direction that could make war a thing of the past.”
Douglas Fry is another end-of-war theorist. In his book Beyond War, the anthropologist claims to have documented 74 “non-warring” tribes, many with minimal contact with civilization. This, he says, is proof that war is not only not hardwired into our genes, but that civilized societies actually promote war.
Brian Ferguson, of Rutgers, says the fossil record indicates that man didn’t commence making war big time until about 14,000 years ago. Prior to that man lived in small nomadic tribes as hunter-gatherers. When trouble was a-brewing he and his fellow tribesmen would simply hop on their camels and ride off for greener pastures, so to speak. The portrait that emerges is of an era where half the population was nomadic bullies and the other half nomadic wimps. This, naturally, runs counter to Ferguson and Fry’s theories, since the more belligerent nomadic tribes would have prospered and, thus, passed on their genes. The peaceable tribes that preferred flight to fight would have grown weak and gradually died out.
ALL THIS CHANGED, Fry says, when the hunter-gatherers learned agriculture and animal husbandry, which resulted in settlements, farms, granaries, temples, all of which gave peaceable man a reason to organize militias and fight for the common defense.
But a second problem with this theory is that not every pre-societal tribe was nomadic. Nomadic people existed largely on continents where there were vast plains and scattered resources. Islanders, whether in the Pacific, or in England, didn’t have the luxury to just walk away from a fight. From the beginning they had to fight to keep what was theirs. Since early man trekked out of Africa he has been drawn to coastal areas and rivers and lakes, and it is unlikely these people allowed themselves to be shooed away without a fight.
In their final flight from reality, Fry and Pinker suggest that since war is not hardwired into our genes, if it is but an adaptation from nomadic to settled, man can re-adapt, and therefore he can become peaceable again. All we need do is eradicate those factors that caused tribal warfare in the past. And here’s the real problem: to completely eliminate war we would have to eliminate the causes of war, i.e., most of man’s excessive desires, and by that I mean his avarice, pride, vengeance, lust for power, and just plain lust (remember the Trojan War?). Wars are also fought over independence, scarce but valuable resources, ancient religious feuds, and political ideology, and I doubt any of these factors are going away any time soon.
While their may be fewer wars, it is puerile and utopian to think man can eliminate war completely. If there are fewer wars today it because the world has more democracies (about 100, up from 20 a half century ago), and democracies seldom go to war with other democracies. What’s more, nations are increasingly linked economically, so the destruction of one nation may mean economic disaster for all. Or to put it another way, “other people become more valuable alive than dead” (Robert Wright). Then there is the deterrence of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction. Pinker credits the creation of more stable nations with effective legal systems and police forces. And increased empathy and diversity means we no longer react as violently and suspiciously to those outside our “tribe.”
Barring some devastating natural disaster or the rise of another utopian political ideology, war will likely become even more rare, more localized, more tribal. But it will never go away completely. I suspect we can live with that.
About the Author
Christopher Orlet writes from St. Louis.
GrammarPerfectionist| 8.12.09 @ 7:48AM
Don't you proof read your work?
"While their may be fewer wars, it is puerile and utopian to think man can eliminate war completely."
While their may be fewer wars should be:
While THERE may be fewer wars .....
Tim| 8.12.09 @ 8:20AM
There will be no more war when there are no more people.
Get a life| 8.12.09 @ 11:32AM
Hmmmm....and "GrammarPerfectionist" is not a word. Don't get out much?
Richard Baker| 8.12.09 @ 11:50AM
Genghis Khan and his Mongols were nomadic. Hitler and his Germans were "civilized". The common denominator is WAR and the willingness to engage in it. Man is condemned to war until Jesus returns and not before. Technology will make the many small wars more lethal instead of less but warring will continue, nonetheless.
Thank god I'm not religious| 8.12.09 @ 12:37PM
Richie:
Based on your profound analysis, I would say man is going to be warring forever, because it's impossible for the dead to return from anywhere regardless of what subsequent fairy tales might say.
fundamentalist| 8.12.09 @ 1:17PM
"...fewer than 3 percent of last century's global population succumbed to war, far fewer than in centuries past ..."
I doubt that history is detailed enough to accurately calculate the percentage of the world's population killed by war in previous centuries. Does Orlet honestly believe that historians know the earth's population and the body count of all previous wars? If they don't, then their conclusions are biased by their data selection.
Besides where is the logic in equating 3% of 1,000 dead with 3% of 100 million dead? It seems only right to compare death in absolute terms.
Finally, there seems to be some logic in concluding that men can kill far more other men with machine guns, artillery and aerial bombing than can men with bows and arrows.
I have to agree that the 20th century was the world's bloodiest century, so far.
Tim| 8.12.09 @ 2:00PM
Strange but true, from Wikipedia:
The Soccer War
"This war was fought at a time when tensions between the two countries were building due to competition in the infamous qualifying games for the 1970 FIFA World Cup tournament. The first game took place in the Honduran capital of Tegucigalpa, with Honduras winning the game. The second game took place in the Salvadoran capital of San Salvador, with a home team win. The game was in a deadlock with each country gaining a revised sense of pride and legitimacy. The Honduran press exploited existing tensions reporting beatings, the burning of cars, and riots by Honduran citizens in El Salvador. In the meantime, Salvadoran press exploited alleged Honduran citizens and security forces attacks on Salvadoran immigrants.
...The war is often cited as the last occasion on which piston-engined fighters fought each other on both sides deploying former World War II and Korean War American types. ..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_War
juanderunner| 8.12.09 @ 3:40PM
I think its pretty ironic that the very academics who created the PC movements and demonized people who won't go along with Obama's policies are declaring the end of war. There is a war and the shooting hasn't started yet. But, if people who disagree with Obama are going to be attacked, they will fight back. By any means necessary. Now, where have I heard that before? Oh yea, the American left's first African hero, Malcom X.
Roy| 8.12.09 @ 3:57PM
"Barring..the rise of another utopian political ideology.."
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?
I suspect the current relatively peaceful state of affairs has more to do with simple US predominance, and the relative benignity with which it is exercised, than any of the factors described above.
Once Obamanomics and globowarmodoom mongering have succeeded in dragging the US economy down, while the Chinese economy continues to go up - we'll see how much "increased empathy" and "diversity" there really is - and how much it matters.
Richard Baker| 8.12.09 @ 4:00PM
Thank god I'm not religious:
Read the history of the world. You will just have to ask Jesus Himself when you meet Him to explain your ideas. Hint: Don't think he'll agree. See you in eternity, sport. Oh, your ideas are called whistling past a graveyard.
Alan Brooks| 8.12.09 @ 5:08PM
no, war CAN be eliminated, but then people would not be people, they would be advanced trans and post humans.
'we' would not be we.
example: a cyborg could not be called a human.
Alan Brooks| 8.12.09 @ 5:10PM
an android is 'droid, but not 'an.
Alan Brooks| 8.12.09 @ 5:12PM
war CAN be eliminated, but then people would not be people, they would be advanced trans and post humans.
'we' would not be we. reincarnation is a myth because you cannot 'come back' as someone or something else because then you are no longer you. you are the other.
the-gunslinger (EOTIS) | 8.12.09 @ 6:36PM
Poor Alan. If you don't "believe", consider the "return of Jesus" as a metaphor for "the end of the world"...so that you can understand the sense of Baker's point and get on with the core conversation.
I don't think he was thumping his Bible at you, Sugar.
You really need to relax that involuntary-atheist-reflex you've got going there. It really does not apply to EVERY conversation.
Richard Baker| 8.12.09 @ 6:56PM
the gunslinger (EOTIS):
When I was in the Army we used the expression "Meetin' Jesus" as shorthand for being right on the edge in a dangerous situation or being close to death whether in a jump or anything else. Glad someone understands the English language.
jordan 6 rings | 8.12.09 @ 8:31PM
I would say man is going to be warring forever, because it's impossible for the dead to return from anywhere regardless of what subsequent fairy tales might say.
Thom| 8.12.09 @ 8:53PM
Any one that truly thinks “war” can be eliminated from humanity has very little knowledge of the nature and the rules it plays by or has never seen what happens when two Ant Colonies (of the same species or different) come in contact in the same patch of ground. Some of what drives humanity to “war” is hard wired rather we like it or not. As individuals we have reason and freedom of choice from that but we still share the same animal instincts that drive one Ant Colony to fight to the last Ant in defense of their little patch of earth. There are no Rodney Kings in the insect world. By the standard of our Conflicts other than war since WWII our killing and losses are trivial pursuit. By the standard of WWII, the Civil war was a blood bath on a proportionate population basis. Same for Revolutionary War. The more “tribal” the culture the more willing it is to kill to the last person standing, i.e. Rwandans killed two or three times our entire losses of WWII in a month with primitive weapons. Idi Amin killed more of his people then we lost in WWII. Same for the Somalis in their little dust up. We’ve demonstrated we will kill by the hundreds of thousands if you mess with us and that is why the rest of the world is in a constant state of conflicts and death and we aren’t (for the most part). The quickest way to get more “wars” is to put forth the concept of “peace in our times” and throw out the means to deter one. We have a history of that…..
Thy Jewish Kingdom in Israel| 8.12.09 @ 9:08PM
SATANS foundation, to hell on earth. The elimination of 50% of humanity and death of the planet for growth to make more money for the Rockefeller & Rothchilds Satanic Kabal.
The wars are Just begining.
Yellowstone | 8.13.09 @ 12:20AM
Thank god I'm not religious
it's impossible for the dead to return from anywhere
Too bad you missed the news that split history...He aint dead.
Adheeb| 8.13.09 @ 2:38PM
Bravo, Yellowstone. You're right!
Thank god I'm not religious| 8.13.09 @ 5:42PM
Gotta love it when the brainwashed faithful come a thumpin'...
Personally, I have no issue with whatever believe people want to fill their free time with. I do take exception that it never seems to fail that whatever the topic some believer seems compelled to inject the big "J" no matter the context. So basically, believe what you want, just kindly stop wasting everyone elses time with irrelevant commentary.
No doubt if TAS published a food recipe, someone would feel the need to suggest that Jesus would have added more salt.
Gotta go...Odin and Thor are at the door
Thank God I'm not religious| 8.13.09 @ 6:01PM
Sorry, when I wrote "whatever believe people"...I meant to say "belief"...wouldn't want to upset GrammarPerfectionist
Richard Baker| 8.13.09 @ 8:35PM
Thank god I'm not religious:
We'll say a prayer for your soul. You need it.
Thank god I'm not religious| 8.13.09 @ 9:20PM
Richard:
Praying for me is your call, it's nice of you, but there are many more important things y0u could pray for, such as our troops overseas.
I'm just fine, thank you.
Hydraulic Valve | 8.13.09 @ 10:14PM
The 20th century was the world's bloodiest century, so far.
Mary| 11.19.09 @ 2:18AM
Video Cutter|iTouch Converter for Mac
Bob Stoppard| 11.25.09 @ 4:05AM
The war will never end, Since human's ambition is exist.
jumpmanual and Mp3 rockets
Kim| 3.30.10 @ 10:48AM
SSL Certificate
Kim| 3.30.10 @ 10:50AM
RapidSSL at very affordable price from ClickSSL.com