i have an assumption. (i'm not a scientist just someone who likes to smoke weed and think a lot)
i personally don't believe that humans were designed for war and hate , so how did we develop such strong negative feelings towards each other? We know that around 50,000 years ago our ancestors traveled north and settled somewhere near what is the asian euro border today , but back then there were other humanoid tribes called neanderthals which are known to be vicious bloodthirsty predators. The neanderthals killed men and ate their flesh and raped the women(hence why neanderthals genes still exist today) , but eventually humans had to take arms and fight back which lead to the extinction of neanderthals. Could it be that humans have been passing down their psychological trauma for generations until it reached us? i don't mean it as hereditary im mean that they raised the next generations on the basis of their trauma.
Most wars are simply about resources. If resources are scarce, wars start over it.
Farms, land, minerals, spices, oil. Luckily these days a human life is more valuable than the clay he sits on, so first world countries don't like attacking each other anymore. It has become too expensive. But attacking a country that provides little to your economy is easy.
Ryder Sullivan
That's also why Russian oil and gas keeps flowing despite boycots. To eliminate the reasons for war.
(besides the nuclear weapons that make it unprofitable)
Hudson Edwards
Agriculture is the source.
Jordan Cruz
Qaddafi for example didn't want to pay oil in dollars anymore. Which set a precedent for other countries who could do the same. And would decrease the demand for the American dollars. And as America is an import economy they would experience a high inflation, making everything more expensive for Americans. This economic attack on America costed him his life.
Noah Scott
>i personally don't believe that humans were designed for war and hate
you probably never heard about tribalism and monkeys too
Owen Reed
And sometimes humans themselves are the resources you want. Such as Germany or France who want to annex the Benelux. Or slave trade.
Easton Evans
>so how did we develop such strong negative feelings towards each other Divide and conquer. Ever heard about that?
so basically if we get to a future where these resources are replaced or produced by technology than no more wars?
can you elaborate?
Eli Bell
Divide and conquer is a battle strategy not an incentive to hate
Angel Martinez
i heard a really interesting theory. Basically in order to be secure you can't have your neighbour be able to come over and kill you on a whim. So you need to be stronger than your neighbour for self defence. But they also have the exact same need which is of course a conflict of interest so both sides build up until they inevitably go to war. Rome conquered Europe in wars it justified as being for self defence.
Jack Peterson
A future where no more wars are needed is possible, if the population sizes remain stable and we invest in a sustainable economy.
But Africans and most Asians don't give a shit about these things.
James Allen
>Divide and rule (or divide and conquer, from Latin dīvide et imperā) in politics and sociology is gaining and maintaining power by breaking up larger concentrations of power into pieces that individually have less power than the one implementing the strategy. The concept refers to a strategy that breaks up existing power structures, and especially prevents smaller power groups from linking up, causing rivalries and fomenting discord among the people.
Yes but most animal fights are for dominance and territory most times they aren't trying to inflict fatal strikes , humans kill like theres no tomorrow and usually for worse reasons.
i think that future is inevitable unfortunately.
No but i laughed really hard at the shower yesterday while high and i fell and hurt my shoulder pretty bad.
Leo Peterson
>can you elaborate? Not him But instinctively You want to fuck up people who are not like You
Dominate or be dominated
Anthony Smith
>But instinctively You want to fuck up people who are not like You Not really. Your priority is to protect yourself. And that usually involves taking out the other.
Or as we say in Dutch: "One's death is another's bread."
Parker Brown
We weren't "designed" that way because we weren't designed on first place; but, if what we know about chimps apply to our last common ancestor, war is literally older than humankind.
And it's always about survival of groups in a Tragedy of the Commons way:
If the other group fights: >if we fight, we'll lose some lives. >if we don't fight, we'll lose everything.
If the other group doesn't fight: >if we fight, we get all their resources and live well. >if we don't fight, we'll live the same as now.
In both circumstances fighting is better than not fighting.
Brody Allen
To me, you’re a nigger
Xavier Gray
So no one wants war but everyone practice it? the logic of this world hurts my brain.
when i wrote "designed" i meant that we never evolved to the point where war is necessity. so there is no natural incentive to kill others? its all psychological?
Zachary Brown
>So no one wants war but everyone practice it? Pretty much. We always want our group to dominate, and the other to not fight back - so that way you get the best. But the other group also thinks that way, so both end fighting = war.
>so there is no natural incentive to kill others? its all psychological? It's mostly social, but there are natural incentives like innate aggressiveness.
Grayson Watson
It depends on the circumstances. Sometimes war is a matter of survival. Sometimes not. You usually want at least the same living standards as your neighbor.
I read in some research that people are happiest when you are slightly richer than your neighbor.
Tyler Gomez
When the Netherlands was the richest country in the world we were constantly attacked by everyone.
Owen Adams
So is psychological evolution also a valid solution? If people will see past their feelings i mean. and if it is how can we achieve it?
>I read in some research that people are happiest when you are slightly richer than your neighbor
Makes sense , i find myself measuring my happiness in comparison to others quit a lot
Ethan Turner
woops my bad >I read in some research that people are happiest when you are slightly richer than your neighbor.
Makes sense , i find myself measuring my happiness in comparison to others quit a lot
