From: dmz1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Daniel M Zabetakis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Why do we all believe war is inevitable?
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:30:33 GMT
Reply-To: dmz1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Daniel M Zabetakis)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Apr5.063517.18334@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka) writes:
>
>Is it because we've never had a lasting peace?  That is,
>
>  a) It (achieving a lasting peace) has never been done before.
>  b) THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE DONE.
>

      Here is my explaination as to why we cannot get rid of war. Let me
first say that if you do not believe in evolution and natural selection
(for religious reasons, maybe), then stop reading now because you won't
believe a word that I am going to say.

     I believe that we cannot stop war anymore than we can stop having
sex, or eating.
     According to the thoery of natural selection, reproduction is the 
sole imperitive of all living things. To reproduce, you must have food,
and so food becomes very important as well. Third, we want to reproduce
with the 'best' of possible mates, so mate selection is also very
important.
     Nature exists in a constant state of competition for limited
resources. Animals compete with other animals for food, plants compete
with other plants for sunlight. Members of the same species compete for
the best mates. This is the usual state of nature.

   In  my theory of war, you must first see that humans are no different
than other animals except that we are (perhaps) more complicated. We have
developed a society that is at least an order of magnitude more complicated
than anything seen in other animals.
    But we have not gotten away for the evolutionary imperitives. Why do
we work? To get food, and to provide for children. We cannot ignore food.
We do not ignore sex. Even if you are sitting in an air conditioned office
on the 20th floor of a skyscraper, you are still in the jungle, as far as
eating and reproduction are concerned.

   Competition takes place at many levels. We compete with others in our
local society (for mates). We compete with other local groups for space
of food, or other recources. We compete with other species for food, etc.
Cooperation can be an effective tool in competition. So we cooperate
with others of our species against other species. And we cooperate with
large social groups against other groups. And we cooperate with members of
our family against other families.
    It is against this backdrop of intertwined loyalties and competitions
that we must view war. War can be viewed as a form of competition between
large social groups. The country going to war reasons that it will be
better for them if they drive off the enemy rather the cooperate. The 
victor gets additional land and resource in which to expand and produce
more people like themselves. This then is the evolutionary imperitive.

   I think we cannot get away from war anymore than we can get away from
any of our biological functions. At least it will have to proved to me that
we can. Any society that removes prejudice against outsiders will be
destroyed by societies that haven't. Ambivalence to competition will
inevitably lead to extinction.


   There is much more that could be said aout this. I don't know what
objections may be raised to me theory. Perhaps I will find out now.

DanZ

This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions, or
narratives contained herein are not necessarily true, and do not
necessarily represent the views of any particular person.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory