[Peace-discuss] binary criterion of war/not war

[LAURIE SOLOMON]

>>I suppose smaller, less powerful countries tend not to declare war on
>>their big, powerful neighbors [there are notable exceptions to this
>>rule]. But in order to have small countries, large powerful countries
>>would also need to exist and the big powerful countries would be
>tempted to create empires.


>That's right.  But I was not speaking only of one country against another,
as we traditionally define countries.  In many countries, perhaps especially
>the smaller ones, two or more groups of people fight and kill one another
over power.  In our own nation, gangs fight and kill one another over
>"territory", etc.

 

I think, for what it is worth, that it is time we take a break from our own
species-centric perspective and try and gain some perspective by looking at
the behaviors of other species. All species of animal - and even some plants
- engage in war against other competing species and even against rivals
within their own species.  Some even engage in alliances to defend
themselves against rivals, competitors, or strangers or to commit acts of
proactive aggression against rivals, competitors, and strangers.  The
motivations can range from dominance within the group or of one group over
another (i.e., to be the alpha leader) to mating rights to control over
territory to access and control over food and shelter to whatever.  The key
difference between man and the other species is that man has honed such wars
into a fine art with specially created and developed implements of
destruction, instruments for maiming and killing, refined strategies and
tactics to control one's opponent, and sophisticated explanations and
justifications for said actions.  They give a priority to preparing for said
acts which often is higher than the priority set for the expenditure of
resources in growing and gathering of food, the building of shelters,  the
production of clothing and other articles or objects necessary for physical
survival - often finding some pretense which sets such things as loyalty,
honor, pride, hubris, God, heroism, etc. as values over and above basic
physical needs.  Most other species do not engage in battle for the sake of
battle or out of love of country, ethnic group, or religion; out of pride or
hubris; or because of a need to generate profits.  But all species do engage
in individual and communal wars of one form or another.

 

>Less, perhaps, but far from zero.  Remember, most of the wars are started
by the leaders of the wealthier, more powerful countries who want to be
>even MORE wealthy and powerful.  Greed has no limit, and it is inherent in
human nature.  Perhaps less so in the Quakers and Mennonites. 

 

I cannot speak about Mennonites; but being a Quaker does not prevent one
from supporting, instigating, engaging in, or becoming involved in the
business of war.  Nixon was a Quaker; and he certainly was not opposed to
fighting the war in Viet Nam or expanding it in its geographic scope in
North Viet Nam and to Cambodia and Laos, in the level of violence  and range
of destruction, or in a number of other covert ways.  I had several friends
in high school who were Quakers and who either enlisted in the military from
high school and volunteer to fight in Viet Nam or took advanced ROTC to
become officers in the military when they graduated from college.  One even
went to the Naval Academy.  A number of other Quakers that I knew of owned
businesses or worked for businesses that profited financially from war by
selling supplies and services to the Defense Department for use in the war
effort.  Greed is not always the great motivator; sometimes crusading for
idealistic goals and evangelistic motives can cause and sustain wars (i.e.,
"making the world safe for Democracy,"  "manifest destiny," "bringing God to
the heathens," etc.).

 

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of John W.
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 12:27 PM
To: Karen Medina
Cc: Peace-discuss List
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] binary criterion of war/not war

 

 

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Karen Medina <kmedina67 at gmail.com> wrote:

> wake me up when one of you figures out a better system of government, in
> terms of your ONE stupid binary criterion of war/not war.

This does bring up an interesting question. I don't think that the
type of government has much to do with whether a country will go to
war.


You're correct; type of government has nothing at all to do with it.

 

What does make a difference?

I suppose smaller, less powerful countries tend not to declare war on
their big, powerful neighbors [there are notable exceptions to this
rule]. But in order to have small countries, large powerful countries
would also need to exist and the big powerful countries would be
tempted to create empires.


That's right.  But I was not speaking only of one country against another,
as we traditionally define countries.  In many countries, perhaps especially
the smaller ones, two or more groups of people fight and kill one another
over power.  In our own nation, gangs fight and kill one another over
"territory", etc.

 

I suppose that a country made up entirely of Quakers and Mennonites
would not start a war. But I don't think religion is a good way to
separate people into countries. [Though I have noticed that Mormon
children consistently share their toys the most readily of all the
children I have observed.]

I suppose that if all the countries were on equal footing with regards
to resources and access to the basic needs, then there would be less
temptation to go to war.


Less, perhaps, but far from zero.  Remember, most of the wars are started by
the leaders of the wealthier, more powerful countries who want to be even
MORE wealthy and powerful.  Greed has no limit, and it is inherent in human
nature.  Perhaps less so in the Quakers and Mennonites.  ;-)  And of course
in AWARE members.  ;-)

 

I think that every 7 years, everything needs to be re-distributed equally.


It would be lovely, but it would do very little to end war.  And who is
going to supervise the redistribution?

 

-karen medina

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090718/ab772400/attachment-0001.html