Who won the war? We did, says everyone

Who won the war? We did, says everyone
Winston Churchill, Joseph Stalin and Franklin D Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference, 1945. Credit: Wikipedia

Ask any of the few remaining World War II veterans what they did during the war and you're likely to get a humble answer. But ask the person on the street how important their country's contribution to the war effort was and you'll probably hear something far less modest. A new study suggests people from Germany, Russia, the UK and the US on average all think their own country shouldered more than half the burden of winning World War II.

Our national collective memories seem to be deceiving us, and this is part of a far more general pattern. Aside from those veterans who have no desire to revel in the horrors of war, we may have a general psychological tendency to believe our contributions are more significant than they really are.

You can see this in even the most mundane of tasks. Unloading the dishwasher can be a perennial source of family irritation. I suspect that I'm doing more than my fair share. The trouble is that so does everybody else. Each of us can think: "The sheer injustice! I'm overworked and under-appreciated."

But we can't all be right. This strange magnification of our own efforts seems to be ubiquitous. In business, sport or entertainment, it's all too easy for each participant to think that their own special stardust is the real reason their company, team or show was a hit.

It works for nations, too. A study last year, led by US memory researcher Henry Roediger III, asked people from 35 countries for the percentage contribution their own has made to world history. A dispassionate judge would, of course, assign percentages that add up to no more than 100% (and, indeed, considerably less, given the 160 or so countries left out). In fact, the self-rating percentages add up to over 1,000%, with citizens of India, Russia and the UK each suspecting on average that their own nations had more than half the responsibility for world progress.

A sceptic might note that "contributing to world history" is a rather nebulous idea, which each nation can interpret to its advantage. (The Italians, at 40%, might focus on the Romans and the Renaissance, for example.) But what about our responsibility for specific world events? The latest study from Roediger's lab addresses the question of national contributions to World War II.

The researchers surveyed people from eight former Allied countries (Australia, Canada, China, France, New Zealand, Russia/USSR, the UK and the US) and three former Axis powers (Germany, Italy and Japan). As might be expected, people from the winning Allied side ranked their own countries highly, and the average percentage responses added up to 309%. Citizens of the UK, US and Russia all believed their countries had contributed more than 50% of the war effort and were more than 50% responsible for victory.

You might suspect that the losing Axis powers, whose historical record is inextricably tied to the immeasurable human suffering of the war, might not be so proud. As former US president John F Kennedy said (echoing the Roman historian Tacitus): "Victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan." Perhaps the results for the Allied countries just reflect a general human tendency to claim credit for positive achievements. Yet citizens of the three Axis powers also over-claim shares of the war effort (totaling 140%). Rather than minimizing their own contribution, even defeated nations seem to overstate their role.

Why? The simplest explanation is that we piece together answers to questions, of whatever kind, by weaving together whatever relevant snippets of information we can bring to mind. And the snippets of information that come to mind will depend on the information we've been exposed to through our education and cultural environment. Citizens of each nation learn a lot more about their country's own war effort than those of other countries. These "home nation" memories spring to mind, and a biased evaluation is the inevitable result.

So there may not be inherent "psychological nationalism" in play here. And nothing special about collective, rather than individual, memory either. We simply improvise answers, perhaps as honestly as possible, based on what our memory provides—and our memory, inevitably, magnifies our own (or our nation's) efforts.

How do you calculate real responsibility?

A note of caution is in order. Assigning responsibilities for past events baffles not just everyday citizens, but academic philosophers. Imagine a whodunit in which two hopeful murderers put lethal doses of cyanide into Lady Fotherington's coffee. Each might say: "It's not my fault—she would have died anyway." Is each only "half" to blame, and hence due a reduced sentence? Or are they both 100% culpable? This poisoning is a simple matter compared with the tangled causes of military victory and defeat. So it is not entirely clear what even counts as over- or under-estimating our responsibilities because responsibilities are so difficult to assess.

Still, the tendency to overplay our own and our nation's role in just about anything seems all too plausible. We see history through a magnifying glass that is pointing directly at ourselves. We learn the most about the story of our own nation. So our home nation's efforts and contributions inevitably spring readily to mind (military and civilian deaths, key battles, advances in technology and so on). The efforts and contributions of other nations are sensed more dimly, and often not at all.

And the magnifying glass over our efforts is pervasive in daily life. I can find myself thinking irritably, as I unload the dishwasher, "Well, I don't even remember the last time you did this!" But of course not. Not because you didn't do it, but because I wasn't there.


Explore further

Think big—at least when it comes to global conservation

More information: Henry L. Roediger et al. Competing national memories of World War II, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2019). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1907992116
Provided by The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.The Conversation

Citation: Who won the war? We did, says everyone (2019, August 15) retrieved 19 September 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-08-won-war-sayseveryone.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
365 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 15, 2019
If by winning you mean securing the nations you went to war to free? UK lost by not freeing Poland from USSR.

Aug 15, 2019
The winning of a war is only supported by a politically correct answer.
Example -- We won the vietnam war. What's that you say? I was there and there was nothing we wanted. Rice farmers that had not changed in hundreds if not thousands of years. They could care less about democracy, capitalism or freedom etc.
The vietnam war was a extension of the Cold War. We won the cold war by making the communist countries spend, spend.spend till they went broke(USSR). A lot of that spending was on vietnam, the space race and other small conflicts.
In the end they went broke and we won. But that view is politically incorrect so you will never here it anywhere but here.

Aug 15, 2019
The winning of a war is only supported


The US won the Vietnam war and withdrew. The democrat US Congress then intentionally caused South Vietnam to lose thus sticking their collective fingers in the eyes of both the Military and Richard Nixon.

Aug 15, 2019
Americans went to Vietnam war to stop the spreading of communism. After heavy losses, USA withdrew and Vietnam became communist. In this modern fake-news world you can call this a victory, but at least I was taught in school that the Americans lost the war of Vietnam.

But the above comments only prove the point of the article. We won the war says everyone.

Aug 15, 2019
The only people that "win" wars, are the financiers...

KBK
Aug 15, 2019
It takes a village to collectively lie to a child.

Aug 15, 2019
cortezz says "was taught in school"


Wel if you were taught that in school it MUST be true! :-)

But you confuse me if as you say "everyone says ----", that would include you or were you spreading false news and you don't really believe "We won the vietnam war"?

Aug 15, 2019
ww2
Germany saved fully 1/2 its country, and the rest of western europe, from communism. Only 50 years later the reunified country became the most prosperous in europe. And if germans hadnt fought them the USSR would have been strong enough to conquer the world.
History says germany won ww2.

Vietnam
The destruction of the ancient, caustic, obsolete cultures was a multigenerational effort by many countries. The US did what it needed to do and when it was done it got the hell out. Liberals were used to give them a convenient excuse to do so [The People have spoken!]
Communists then took over tag team style and finished the job.

Today the country is a stable and productive member of the world community as a result. This is victory by any measure. The same process is ongoing in afghanistan, north korea, and elsewhere wherever religion dictates growth.

The main effect of all these wars was eliminating the religions that would have resisted family planning and ABORTION [1 BILLION+]

Aug 15, 2019
Americans went to Vietnam war to stop the spreading of communism.

And that worked right? We won the cold war which put a major dent in the spread of communism.
Vietnam itself is of no consequence.

Aug 16, 2019
But you confuse me if as you say "everyone says ----", that would include you or were you spreading false news and you don't really believe "We won the vietnam war"?

I believe in school books. They are usually validated science.

I say we won the war about wars in which my home country was a part of. I'm Finnish so I consider we had a defensive victory over Soviets in the WWII even thought we officially lost.

And that worked right? We won the cold war which put a major dent in the spread of communism.
Vietnam itself is of no consequence.

Yes you "won" the cold war but you lost the war of Vietnam. Even thought it was a loss, it showed that Americans are ready to be the whole worlds own democracy police and made other countries rethink going into communism.

Aug 16, 2019
Americans are ready to be the whole worlds own democracy police and made other countries rethink going into communism.


Well you got that part right. Which part of that sentence is a bad thing?
Americans love guns and are a very violent people by nature. That is what makes us a country to be reckoned with. I would have it no other way because "Freedom is not free" and there are sacrifices to be made.

Aug 16, 2019
Well you got that part right. Which part of that sentence is a bad thing?
Americans love guns and are a very violent people by nature. That is what makes us a country to be reckoned with. I would have it no other way because "Freedom is not free" and there are sacrifices to be made.

I didn't mean it as a bad thing at all. I was just trying to say that even thought USA lost the war, they made something good out of it.

Aug 16, 2019
I didn't mean it as a bad thing at all. I was just trying to say that even thought USA lost the war, they made something good out of it.


It was technically not war but a battle.(Police action) Whose objective was to make the communists spend money. Which they did big time.

BTW I was out of school when that action ended. So I don't know what they taught about it. Do any of you kids remember what the textbooks said, as far as declaring a winner?

Aug 16, 2019
It was technically not war but a battle.(Police action) Whose objective was to make the communists spend money. Which they did big time.

BTW I was out of school when that action ended. So I don't know what they taught about it. Do any of you kids remember what the textbooks said, as far as declaring a winner?

I don't mind the technicalities but I disagree with you about the objectives of the war. The objective of the war was clearly to stop Vietnam from becoming communist which did happen eventually.

I have no time to look for book sources now but I think Wikipedia is good enough source for providing the general unbiased information about the war: https://en.wikipe...tnam_War

There it says: "Result: North Vietnamese and National Liberation Front victory"

Aug 16, 2019
But you confuse me if as you say "everyone says ----", that would include you or were you spreading false news and you don't really believe "We won the vietnam war"?


I believe in school books
Hahahaha.
They are usually validated science
"Historicism
Theories of history or politics that allegedly predict future events have a logical form that renders them neither falsifiable nor verifiable. They claim that for every historically significant event, there exists an historical or economic law that determines the way in which events proceeded."

-History is not science.

Aug 16, 2019
"History is always written by the winners. When two cultures clash, the loser is obliterated, and the winner writes the history books-books which glorify their own cause and disparage the conquered foe. As Napoleon once said, 'What is history, but a fable agrees upon?"

-History is propaganda, ESPECIALLY the sort you read in school books. You may be able to trust accounts of major events, but you can never trust explanations as to why they occur.

Aug 16, 2019
People like dorkus are especially susceptible.
Americans love guns and are a very violent people by nature. That is what makes us a country to be reckoned with
Ask cortexx about the winter war. Finns are historically some of the best fighters in europe. The US has never had to fight a total war.

Aug 16, 2019
And as far as mass shootings go, finland is way ahead in stats
http://worldpopul...country/

-Right cortezz? Or is this not in your history books?

Aug 16, 2019
History is not science.

It's not science in the same way as natural sciences. But as you said, major events and happenings are mostly correct and more one knows about history, the more one can deduct and find similarities and causes from the events.

And as far as mass shootings go, finland is way ahead in stats
http://worldpopul...country/

-Right cortezz? Or is this not in your history books?

At least, it's not in the history books yet. School shootings are a new thing here, not much history yet. It's a bit funny that Finland is so high on those ratings but we are a small country. If you check the list of massacres in Finland (https://en.wikipe...inland), there's been only 30 deaths in the last 20 years. I think more Americans are gunned to death every day or even every hour?


Aug 16, 2019
not science in the same way as natural sciences
Its not science AT ALL, except in the sense that mass deception is a science.
But as you said, major events and happenings are mostly correct
I didn't say that. You can't hide the occurrence of major events or the major facts around them. You CAN totally misconstrue their causes. more one knows about history, the more one can deduct and find similarities and causes If you assume that history is propaganda written by winners intent on justifying and maintaining their rule, and that this involves deception, collusion, and obstruction, then you have to approach history as any detective would examine a crime scene; that is, forensically. And forensics IS a science.

Nowhere in the official historical narrative will you find the terms overpopulation and tribalism. But these 2 conditions are always the cause of conflict. This might not seem obvious because modern wars are preemptive in nature, designed and orchestrated.

Aug 16, 2019
think more Americans are gunned to death every day or even every hour?
'Gunned down'? Nice propaganda. Per capita, America is far less violent than most anywhere else. Just look at the link I provided above.

We just had a 'mass shooting' in phila. Some drug dealing gang banger, a career criminal, shot some cops who showed up to arrest him, and then holed up for several hours before surrendering. Then, in an unrelated incident 5 people were shot a few miles away in a drive by, evidence of a gang war.

We already have dozens of laws preventing people like these from owning guns. But the people who write history are calling these incidents reasons to disarm the general populace, rather than addressing drug- and gang-related violence, which they are powerless against.

Its foul and evil. But its typical of how history gets written.

Aug 16, 2019
If you assume that history is propaganda written by winners intent on justifying and maintaining their rule, and that this involves deception, collusion, and obstruction, then you have to approach history as any detective would examine a crime scene; that is, forensically. And forensics IS a science.

Here the school system teaches a good amount of source criticism. We know that the history isn't always that what is written and we and taught to think with our own head.

Nowhere in the official historical narrative will you find the terms overpopulation and tribalism. But these 2 conditions are always the cause of conflict. This might not seem obvious because modern wars are preemptive in nature, designed and orchestrated.

Really? Maybe nowhere in the official historical narrative taught to you. I have learned about many wars that have started because of need for more land. We have also been taught that nationalism (modern tribalism) have led to numerous wars.

Aug 16, 2019
I don't mind the technicalities but I disagree with you about the objectives of the war. The objective of the war was clearly to stop Vietnam from becoming communist which did happen eventually.

That is the politically correct thing to say and think.
What source can say all those people died on both sides just to make the communists spend money?
Which they did. And that little known fact makes it a HOT war not a cold war.

I have no time to look for book sources now but I think Wikipedia is good enough source for providing the general unbiased information about the war:


We are not talking about the real reason here, we are talking about what was taught in school.

Most people I talk to think we lost the vietnam war, Now you tell me the text books probably say we lost the vietnam war.
So then this article is wrong.

Aug 16, 2019
'Gunned down'? Nice propaganda. Per capita, America is far less violent than most anywhere else. Just look at the link I provided above.

We already have dozens of laws preventing people like these from owning guns. But the people who write history are calling these incidents reasons to disarm the general populace, rather than addressing drug- and gang-related violence, which they are powerless against.

Is gunned down somehow a bad term? I used it for just to say that people die from firearms.

Now you are jumping in to weird conclusions. I have not read a single thing about American gun control from the history books we have used here. If you think the rest of the world reads American news stories about shootings as history, you are just wrong. We were taught a great deal about the American civil war and Indians and stuff but not much about what has happened in the American continent after 1900. I think most of us learn those things from movies and media.

Aug 16, 2019
Really? Maybe nowhere in the official historical narrative taught to you. I have learned about many wars that have started because of need for more land
-So you have any examples? Let me offer one... were you taught that Germany needed lebensraum because Germany was overcrowded? Or because germans considered it their promised land that was infested with untermenschen?
We have also been taught that nationalism (modern tribalism) have led to numerous wars
-But you were never taught that nationalism is a form of tribalism. You learned that from reading my very excellent posts.

We were all taught that aggression among nations is always due to the greed and insanity of their leaders. If overpopulation was ever acknowledged as the cause if war then questions would be asked as to what causes overgrowth. How do we curtail it? How do we prevent families from having more children? Have there ever been efforts to do this?

Have you ever seen questions like this in your history books?

Aug 16, 2019
The closest thing might be the 'one child per family' laws in china, which have been universally regarded as immoral in the west.
gunned down
'Gunned down' as opposed to just 'shot'? You dont see the emotional content in your trigger phrase? How about blown away? Butchered with uzis? Weapons of war?

Aug 16, 2019
I've been thinking about guns and weapons in general in the context of the tribe and human development. Technology is what started the whole thing - protohumans became able to hunt the predators that had been keeping their numbers in check. They did this primarily with hand-held weapons - sharpened sticks with fire-hardened points, darts, killing sticks, and so forth.

Their numbers exploded and the species congealed into tribes. Thereafter a nonstop arms race ensued, along with improved tactics, leadership, cooperation, communication, planning, specialized labor, etc.

The tribes that made advances in any of these gained an advantage on the battlefield. So weapons became an intimate and integral part of a tribalists life. They became in effect an extension, an additional organ, of our bodies.

Girls play with dolls, boys play with weapons. The need to hold and care for either is biological and gender-specific.

"My arm is whole!" said the officer whose sidearm was returned to him.

Aug 16, 2019
The need for weapons transcends the logic of self-protection. There is a craving that originates in our genes. Weapons are a source of comfort and confidence and we feel incomplete and crippled without them.

And when cultural domestication convinces us to give them up we still want to replace them with cricket bats, baseballs, walking sticks, cell phones, etc. Interesting that we tend to use them in a tribal context; teams, clubs, social networks.

Aug 16, 2019
We already have dozens of laws preventing people like these from owning guns.


I think the simplest law that says it all.

Murder is illegal!

You can pass all the laws you want but that one law should be enough. The point is someone who is set on murder can not be stopped by 10,000 laws.

Aug 16, 2019
Weapons are a source of comfort and confidence and we feel incomplete and crippled without them.
And yet the most powerful martial art of all is turning the other cheek...

Aug 16, 2019
Weapons are a source of comfort and confidence and we feel incomplete and crippled without them.
And yet the most powerful martial art of all is turning the other cheek...


I am 72 years old and tried that with my last home invasion. One of them had a claw hammer up his sleeve. You, young man are thinking everyone is as nice as you. Some people like hurting other people.

Aug 17, 2019
Weapons are a source of comfort and confidence and we feel incomplete and crippled without them.
And yet the most powerful martial art of all is turning the other cheek...
And please do remind all those whose religions were extincted by the religion that coined that novel form of doublethink, okay? Start with the cathars.

The church was founded during a military campaign.

"According to Eusebius, Constantine saw a vision of a cross rather than the letters of Christ. "He saw with his own eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and bearing the inscription, CONQUER BY THIS."

-They all were. Mohammad re mecca and medina, Joshua re his genocidal rampage through the holy land, Buddhists eradicated from their homeland, etc ad infinitum.

Religion is the most potent form of tribalism ever invented. Spreads farther and quicker, provokes greater internal harmony along with external animosity and aggression. Sanctioned and demanded by GOD.

Aug 17, 2019
I suspect this will cause me to be flamed but:

Who won the Cold War? The USA or Russia?

Answer: China!

That's right. The USA did win the battle against Russia but in the long run, I think it's China that has benefited the most by a long shot.

Aug 17, 2019
The USA or Russia?
Answer: China!
That's right. The USA did win the battle against Russia but in the long run, I think it's China that has benefited the most by a long shot.


While I admire your ability(unlike most) to think outside the box, I think the cold war has been over for a long time. If we don't have a point in history when a war ends, then how far into the future do we look for the outcome/winner. If in another 200 years Russia, United States, and China are gone then do we proclaim the Icelanders the winner of the cold war, because they benefited most?

Aug 18, 2019
Religion is the most potent form of tribalism ever invented. Spreads farther and quicker, provokes greater internal harmony along with external animosity and aggression. Sanctioned and demanded by GOD.

I would recommend watching the infographic "The Fallen of World War II".
https://www.youtu...PFT-RioU

Aug 19, 2019
.....and French people said they contributed to victory THAT MUCH? Bull. In school, we're taught that we heavily contributed to Germany going insane, along with the financial crisis of the 20', and our higher ups totally messed up and made us the lamest winner, if the word applies to us, of the WW2, which we would have hardly went through without our colonial units.
Or did they question the few morons who nevee went to school at all??

Aug 19, 2019
.....and French people said they contributed to victory THAT MUCH? Bull. In school, we're taught that we heavily contributed to Germany going insane, along with the financial crisis of the 20', and our higher ups totally messed up and made us the lamest winner, if the word applies to us, of the WW2, which we would have hardly went through without our colonial units.
Or did they question the few morons who nevee went to school at all??


With all that great thinking and insight you forgot to say who WE and US are in your comment.

Aug 19, 2019
Religion is the most potent form of tribalism ever invented. Spreads farther and quicker, provokes greater internal harmony along with external animosity and aggression. Sanctioned and demanded by GOD.

I would recommend watching the infographic "The Fallen of World War II".
https://www.youtu...PFT-RioU
Thanks for that. I was aware of much of it. The numbers make it clear that the allies had little to do with the german/Russian war; 90% of german soldiers (I object to calling them 'nazi soldiers') who died were killed by russians. Germans killed russians 4 to 1 but were outnumbered 5 to 1, so the outcome was never really in doubt.
Cont>

Aug 19, 2019
The numbers also make clear why we landed in Normandy. Germany was defeated by that point and on the run. We landed to prevent the russians from overrunning all of europe. Hitler knew this which is why he divided his forces and allowed the invasion to take place.

But it wasn't enough just to occupy western europe. The Soviets had to know they faced a credible force. So hitler staged the battle of the bulge, knowing full well he had no hope of winning.

The allies fought many of the same troops that had resisted the Soviets on the eastern front, even though they were severely depleted and ill equipped. But it showed the Soviets that the allies were going to stop them in germany.

This war was staged, choreographed, and executed to achieve a predetermined result. They all are. Obviously.

The greatest sin would be to let the inevitable happen by itself.


Aug 19, 2019
"If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don't want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances." - Sen. Harry S. Truman

-Like I say, preengineered. Managed. Constructive, beneficial wars. And they are always more than willing to tell us all about it.

Aug 19, 2019
The greatest sin would be to let the inevitable happen by itself.
No, it would be getting fooled again into taking up arms any time any where for any reason.

Aug 19, 2019
Still relevant, * s t i l l * prayin' -
Won't Get Fooled Again

War breaks every civilized law there is. It is obsolete, horrifically unnecessary, and no one should be allowed to benefit from it ...

Aug 19, 2019
no one should be allowed to benefit from it ..

Hay dreamer, you benefited from war over and over. Why do you think you live so well? Why do you think you live in a country instead of a small tribe in a mud hut?

Aug 19, 2019
Still relevant, * s t i l l * prayin' -
https://www.youtu...rZgojY1Q

War breaks every civilized law there is. It is obsolete, horrifically unnecessary, and no one should be allowed to benefit from it ...
You forgot the best part

"Yeaaah!
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss..."

-Sorry, we wont let cowards like you let freedom be erased.

Aug 20, 2019
-Sorry, we wont let cowards like you let freedom be erased.
What freedom, Ghost? These days war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength. The greatest cowards of all fear peace, equality, and good will. They fear the light of day that shows all the world their lies. They fear truth itself. They fear loosing all their ill-gotten gains. They fear the populace they've so royally screwed for generations. What have i said or done that makes you think i'm a coward about anything?

Aug 20, 2019
What have i said or done that makes you think i'm a coward about anything?


Protoplasmix, what a dumb thing to ask, while hiding behind a fake name.

Aug 20, 2019
eta:
You forgot the best part
Haven't forgotten a thing. What kind of mental gymnastics are you doing that in one thread you plainly recognize the contrivance of wars, while in another you glorify such genocidal travesties?

Aug 20, 2019
What have i said or done that makes you think i'm a coward about anything?


Protoplasmix, what a dumb thing to ask, while hiding behind a fake name.
Hiding? You misunderstand. Much. If you know who invented the internet, then you know nothing is hidden from those with a need to know. It's just a username, like an aka or a nickname or a call sign, and it's as genuine as it gets. Numbnuts.

Aug 20, 2019
eta:
You forgot the best part
Haven't forgotten a thing. What kind of mental gymnastics are you doing that in one thread you plainly recognize the contrivance of wars, while in another you glorify such genocidal travesties?
In an overcrowded world, war is inevitable. Somebody out there thinks they deserve what you have more than you do. If you're not willing to defend yourself then they will kill you for it. If you're not willing to defend yourself then they DO deserve it more than you.

If you're not willing to defend yourself then your life is not worth living.

"Cowardice is impotence worse than violence. The coward desires revenge but being afraid to die, he looks to others, maybe the government of the day to do the work of defense for him. A coward is less than a man. He does not deserve to be a member of a society of men and women" – Mahatma Gandhi

Aug 20, 2019
It's a simple equation. We are a tropical species living in a temperate world. As such, our world has always been overcrowded. We formed into tribes to protect ourselves and our resources. As tribes grew they would always come into conflict over resources.

This was the beginning of war. And with each advance in technology or social order, the frequency and intensity of war increases. War does not violate any 'civilized law'. It IS the law. Those tribes that weren't as good at it were overrun by those that were.
http://rint.recht...rid2.htm

Speciation is a law is it not? Tribalism is the uniquely human form of group selection. A million years of tribalism is what has made us human. And it is only now that we have become able to avoid it, by artificially limiting our growth.
Cont>

Aug 20, 2019
Governments most important job is to protect it's individuals rights. I find it strange to call it cowardice if you expect help from the gov.

Aug 20, 2019
Cortexx might like this

"14 "Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. 15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood." Rev22

-Civilization is not inevitable. The tribes that are better at gathering and securing resources will always be under assault by those that are not. In an overcrowded world, the only way to survive is to be proactive in defense.

"Angrif ist die beste Verteidigung."

"There is a [PROPER] time for everything,
and a season for every activity under the heavens:
8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace" ecc3

"The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Aug 20, 2019
Why is that addressed to me?

Agree with Otto that nationalism (tribalism) is one of the main causes for war. Nationalism is so strong today that a common threat could help humanity work together. We need an asteroid coming towards earth or something strange with UFOs.

Aug 20, 2019
It's just a username, like an aka or a nickname or a call sign, and it's as genuine as it gets. Numbnuts.


Are you trying to fool us or do you really believe that? I am guessing you are way to much of a coward to give your real name and address.

Aug 20, 2019
In an overcrowded world, war is inevitable. Somebody out there thinks they deserve what you have more than you do. If you're not willing to defend yourself then they will kill you for it. If you're not willing to defend yourself then they DO deserve it more than you
See, this is where you're wrong about me and by extension wrong about everyone like me, who would gladly share with anyone in need, who would circumvent the need for violence by giving, and who would happily provide whatever technological assistance is necessary for a permanently peaceful, equitable resolution. When you can use robots to grow cotton on the moon, why would any nation be jealous or envious enough to kill and steal something that they could freely have just for the asking? Humanity has outgrown any need for war. Be realistic, Ghost, war isn't the least bit necessary or inevitable anymore; accept that and get over it.

Aug 20, 2019
It's just a username, like an aka or a nickname or a call sign, and it's as genuine as it gets. Numbnuts.


Are you trying to fool us or do you really believe that? I am guessing you are way to much of a coward to give your real name and address.
Well, you can guess that i'm not a coward, or you can be wrong, don't know what else to tell you ...

Aug 20, 2019
gladly share with anyone in need, who would circumvent the need for violence by giving, and who would happily provide whatever technological assistance is necessary for a permanently peaceful, equitable resolution
I understand very well. Most people have no appreciation for 'inevitable'. Wild animals understand inevitable. It's in their genes. They build nests and dig burrows and fly south for the winter. Domesticated humans on the other hand buy insurance and demand new laws and pray to their gods for miracles that will save them from the inevitable.

You have nothing left to share. You've given everything you've got to give. Your children are starving. Theirs are starving. And they're marching on your front gate to take what little you have left. Are you going to fight?

Overpopulation makes this scenario INEVITABLE. Throughout history. City mounds dot the middle east, testament to the rise of order and its destruction by the forces of chaos, over and over again.

Aug 20, 2019
you can use robots to grow cotton on the moon
We cant grow cotton on the moon you moron.

Pharoah had a bad dream. He called on joseph to explain it to him. "God is telling you that you will have 7 years of feast followed by 7 years of famine." Joseph and Pharoah understood the inevitable and began to build granaries and store grain. But of course the people did not. And when their numbers inevitably exceeded the food supply and their children began to starve, which had always been the case, they begged their gods for salvation. But only joseph and pharaoh could give them that, and they charged a pretty penny for it. And very soon they owned everything of value in egypt.

This works even better when you have accrued enough power to determine the course of future events. When you can plan and stage wars or market collapses or commodity shortages you can reap unimaginable profit and power like a soros or a Rothschild, or the People who they work for.

Pharoahs never went away.

Aug 20, 2019
Religion is responsible for our lack of appreciation of the inevitable. And yet their holy books tell us exactly what it is.

"A TIME for Everything
3 There is a time for everything,
and a SEASON for every activity under the heavens:

2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
3 a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build... etcetc" ecc3

-Read the whole thing. It's very illuminating when you understand what it means.

"18 I also said to myself, "As for humans, god tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals...." ecc3

-The reason that we can read the truth right before our eyes and totally miss the meaning of it, is because we are DOMESTICATED, and not wild, animals. Like prophylasmix, we think everything is fixable for good people who want to do the right thing.

It's not. Or rather, sometimes war is necessary to fix it.

Aug 20, 2019
war isn't the least bit necessary or inevitable anymore; accept that and get over it
-The developed nations, like the shining city in revelations, has achieved zero growth. But they are surrounded by ancient, caustic, virulent, religious-based cultures who still believe that god will be providing for however many children they choose to gift him with. And when he INEVITABLY does not, they will seek to take from those nations who have what they need.

Their children are ALREADY starving. Your robots can grow all the grain they want. If you manage to feed this gen, then the very next gen will be that much larger and that much hungrier. And they will raid your granaries, steal your food, burn your cities, and kill your children. Because their GODS are telling them that that is the proper course of action.

"Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked etc" isa13

Aug 20, 2019
Luckily, along limiting our growth, technology has given us the unprecedented ability to fight wars with fewer people. We no longer need religion to force the growth of large armies.

"Boko Haram is a branch of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. It has been active in Nigeria since 2009. The name of the group means "Western" or "non-Islamic" education is a sin."

-Their very name means that anything you might try to teach them is evil. Typical of any religion anywhere.

You cant negotiate. You can't bribe. You can't just threaten. Religionists will not give up their ruinous cultural practices except by force. It may take gens and the participation of many nations such as in vietnam or china, or it may be done in only 1 or 2 gens such as in Cambodia, Japan and nazi germany, or in mesoamerica.

Prophylaxmix thinks his is the first gen to try it his way.

"15 Whatever is has already been,
and what will be has been before... nothing new under the sun..." Ecc3

Aug 20, 2019
Pretty funny, maybe read some science and cite that to support your arguments, because the ancient dogma you're relying on is . . . mythological, i thought you knew that? i thought you hated philosophers ...

Aug 20, 2019
don't know what else to tell you ...

How about you name and address coward?

Aug 20, 2019
don't know what else to tell you ...

How about you name and address coward?
Sorry, you're not my type.

Aug 20, 2019
What makes _you_ so brave rderkis?

Aug 20, 2019
science and cite that to support your arguments, because the ancient dogma you're relying on is . . . mythological
Tell me what isnt already obvious to you and Ill provide evidence.
i thought you knew that? i thought you hated philosophers ...
Formal philosophy is just more deception, more sociopolitical grooming, husbandry. You want to know history, you have to assume the good stuff has been hidden. You approach the past forensically. You accept a few undeniable basics like our tropical repro rate (disguised for centuries by the 'euro origin' theory), overpop (still denied), tribalism (never acknowledged), ubiquitousness of war (tool-makers instead of weapons makers), etc.

One leads to the other. You end up with a consistent, dependable, explanation for all the major, undeniable events of history.

And its not pretty, not very palatable, but somehow comforting. Weve finally become able to beat the repro rate. We can sustain global civilization w/o religion. We're winning.

Aug 20, 2019
maybe read some science
Science? We're tropical animals. Science. Technology has systematically eliminated all natural attritive elements. Science. Our repro rate hasnt adjusted to compensate. Science. Tribalism is a scientific FACT.

What youve always been taught about these things is not science. It is deception meant to keep you participating. Fighting in wars that have been designed from start to finish to produce a predetermined result. Investing in markets that are controlled to operate in a predetermined manner. Voting for politicians who have already been elected. Consuming stuff that you know makes you sick. Etc.

Tribalism is domestication with all the implications. We have been bred to serve the greater good for a million years.

Like I say, if something can be controlled then leaving it to operate by itself is a heinous sin. And everything in this world today can be controlled. It is the people who are the true enemies of Leaders everywhere.

Aug 20, 2019
You understand history and apologize for its faults. War isn't compatible with science, rationality, intelligence, or abundance. It has become a tool for oppressors, and humanity needs to refuse to engage in it. Some science: War Is Not Part of Human Nature

And they did too grow cotton on the moon (call me a moron will ya), it allegedly suffered an early frost. As a proof of concept it was a total success, absolute disruption to the point of annihilation of capitalism, which is clearly as obsolete as war -- currently humanity's two greatest impediments to further evolution and quicker progress...

Aug 20, 2019
What makes _you_ so brave rderkis?


You are nuts! I was not the one saying Quote you "What have i said or done that makes you think i'm a coward about anything?"

Aug 21, 2019
You understand history and apologize for its faults. War isn't compatible with science, rationality, intelligence, or abundance
History tells us war is the source of all of these. I'm not apologizing for anything. Acknowledging something is not condoning it. I'm telling you how things obviously ARE.

Remember Woodstock? "If we all try real hard, maybe we can stop this rain! No_rain no_rain no_rain *sploosh*"

You guys always take this attitude. You blame the detective for the murder. Again, religion-derived. Heresy invites the devil.
War breaks every civilized law there is
-So specifically, what laws does war break? Are you saying that armies are illegal? Or only the use of them?

Aug 21, 2019
"11 He has made everything beautiful in its own time" ecc3

-Read it. I suppose you think death itself 'breaks every civilized law there is'.

A simpler equation:
Overpopulation makes war inevitable.
The only way to stop war is to reduce growth.
The only way to reduce growth on this planet, with these cultures, is through war.

Aug 21, 2019
"Oh but otto, people will die and it will be horrible."

People are already dying and it is already horrible. Take it up with boko haram. Try not to mewl too much.

Aug 21, 2019
To the TheGhostofOtto1923. I have long ago blocked your messages and told you so.
You posted ~25 comments on here out of ~70 comments. That's more than 1/3. Most of your comments are one following another, following another.
As a person that advocates following rules and moral principles perhaps you should check out the first guideline "Brevity is the soul of wit:"

Aug 21, 2019
Oh I know it hurts when people ignore you dorkus but perhaps if you weren't such a twit you'd have more friends?

Have you ever tried not being a twit? Just a suggestion.

Aug 21, 2019
Like I said "To the TheGhostofOtto1923. I have long ago blocked your messages and told you so."
I still did not read your message but if you are your usual dimwitted self, your last message was directed at me. I simply stated the FACTS about your abundant long winded tirades. I thought you liked facts!?

Aug 22, 2019
And youre a liar dorkus. You read everything I write dont you?

Aug 28, 2019
.....and French people said they contributed to victory THAT MUCH? Bull. In school, we're taught that we heavily contributed to Germany going insane, along with the financial crisis of the 20', and our higher ups totally messed up and made us the lamest winner, if the word applies to us, of the WW2, which we would have hardly went through without our colonial units.
Or did they question the few morons who nevee went to school at all??


With all that great thinking and insight you forgot to say who WE and US are in your comment.


Oh. Right. "We" meant the French of course. On that comment, that is.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more