The Root Cause of War: Is It Simply Human Nature?

[Andre]

Thanks OmCheeto, it looks like we agree.

May I wrap that up in my generic memorial speech, and feel free to copy it.

Dear friends
We are gathered here today to honor and pay respect to those dearly beloved who have gone before us defending our freedom, so that we may live free. We reflect on their service and their sacrifice defending our country and our people against the enemy.

But during this reflection it occurs to me that in many places on Earth, memorials are held on different days for different countries, when people pay respect to their heroes. We have called them enemies and they have called us enemies. And then I wonder why?

Why was it that both sides were determined to take lives for each one's own good cause. Did the end justify the means? We thought it did, because we were all convinced of the evilness of the enemy, we lived in fear, and our hopes for a bright future were dim. We were convinced that we had no choice but to eliminate the threat. Sometimes that choice was indeed inevitable, when we had to defend ourselves against actual acts of war.

But was it always inevitable? Now we know that the others, the people, the ones we used to call enemies, had exactly the same thoughts, that we were the evil enemy.

But we were no threat to them at all, we just wanted to live in peace and have a happy future together with the beloved ones we commemorate today. I guess it’s not too farfetched to assume that this too was the wish of the other side, the people in the street.

But why then, do we listen to those who come to tell us that we have a terrible enemy who needs to be eliminated or our future would be taken away and we would all perish? Why do we want to believe that so much? Is it the desire to feel comradeship that a common enemy brings about? Is it our eagerness to go and take action against the enemy given in by our wish to do good? But above all our wish to contribute to the common cause and show that we are a respected member of our society?

But don’t those on the other side do exactly the same thing? So if they do what we do, aren’t we like them, aren’t we our own enemy? Aren’t we part of the cause for this memorial? And will we create more reasons for this memorial in the future?

Dear friends
If we want to break this mutual positive feedback effect, we must no longer think in terms of them versus us. We must resist our initial reaction and resist the idea that we have an enemy. We must recognize demagoguery and we must not take it for granted when we are told that we have a terrible enemy.

Go back home and get friends on PF and facebook and so on, in China and Iran, Russia and Pakistan, Nigeria, Indonesia, Vietnam, wherever you can find them. Talk with them, share thoughts and discover that peace is answered with peace. And then realize, there is no them and us. We are all in this live together. Let's' not waste more precious lives of our fellows our home country or our neighbor’s and perhaps we can prevent having to commemorate more heroes than the ones we respectfully remember today.

 

[OmCheeto]

May I wrap that up in my generic memorial speech, and feel free to copy it.

Copied and distributed.

Thank you.

 

[Ms Music]

Andre, that is awesome!

 

[ThomasT]

( ...) If we want to break this mutual positive feedback effect, we must no longer think in terms of them versus us.

I agree with your sentiments, and the idea that it would be a better world for all of us if everybody heeded those directives or suggestions. Unfortunately, it seems to contradict what the evidence suggests is our nature. That is, the statement ...

... there is no them and us.

... seems to be contradicted by the historical record.

It would indeed be a nicer world if the strong didn't dominate and exploit the weak. There are certainly lots of people doing their part in being good neighbors. Unfortunately there are those whose stars burn a bit brighter than the norm who are particularly resistant to such messages. So we have to, on many levels, be prepared for conflict, or we'll be at the mercy of people with various weapons who mean to dominate us, imho.

 

[OmCheeto]

I agree with your sentiments, and the idea that it would be a better world for all of us if everybody heeded those directives or suggestions. Unfortunately, it seems to contradict what the evidence suggests is our nature. That is, the statement ...
... seems to be contradicted by the historical record.

It would indeed be a nicer world if the strong didn't dominate and exploit the weak. There are certainly lots of people doing their part in being good neighbors. Unfortunately there are those whose stars burn a bit brighter than the norm who are particularly resistant to such messages. So we have to, on many levels, be prepared for conflict, or we'll be at the mercy of people with various weapons who mean to dominate us, imho.

An acquaintance at work laughed at me today when I mentioned the finale to the thread. He retorted something similar to what you just said.

I reminded him, that there was no internet, historically.

I didn't ask any of my non-PF international facebook friends to be my friend*. I went to facebook, Al Jazeera in particular, and started saying, what they apparently could not. Friendship requests started popping up from all over the world.

It was a very strange feeling to think that there were places on the Earth where you could be executed for speaking your mind, and was very humbled to think that I might be speaking for them.

Sometimes, I think we take our freedom for granted.

But we have it, and just posting your opinion can be that; "Do what you can do" thingy. If enough people around the world can see that everyone else is thinking the same thing, then well, maybe...

From my Grecian Radical Hippy's Front Page:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/542781_3144599772462_1189035662_32487283_1257807377_n.jpg​

*With the exception of one. He is the googlewhack of facebook friends. He posted something in Arabic on Obama's facebook page. I figured it was some nasty Al-Qaedaish inspired insult. But I google translated it, and it turned out to be a greeting. It was refreshing, and made me a bit embarrassed that I was so presumptive. I requested his friendship, and he accepted.

 

[ThomasT]

Nice post Om.

 

[OmCheeto]

It would indeed be a nicer world if the strong didn't dominate and exploit the weak.

It would be even nicer if the weak would stop electing the strong who keep exploiting them. But you know how charming and convincing sociopaths can be.

 

[Andre]

Two more things, it's not so much the strong exploiting the weak, but the moral enterpreneurs cultivating fear to the crowd. Herd instinct makes them turn into believers and haters of the other side. That's the essence of the cause of WW-II.

Second. The internet can be a great medium to profilerate friendship but moral enterpreneurs can also use it to spread fear more easily. I won't link but if you google ' keeping the world on track for devastating romm ' - without parenthesis, you will find a nice example as first hit normally. I would specifically recommend to read the first response to the article.

Edit: and if you want to know what was snipped out of that first response, googling ' A student in despair over ' may help.

 

[Andre]

The internet can be a great medium to profilerate friendship but moral enterpreneurs can also use it to spread fear more easily. I won't link but if you google ' keeping the world on track for devastating romm ' - without parenthesis, you will find a nice example as first hit normally. I would specifically recommend to read the first response to the article.

Edit: and if you want to know what was snipped out of that first response, googling ' A student in despair over ' may help.

I noticed that the first google suggestion is now under the second hit. Anyway, the second google suggestion tells the whole story too.

 

[Ms Music]

It would be even nicer if the weak would stop electing the strong who keep exploiting them. But you know how charming and convincing sociopaths can be.

So now are we back to the sociopaths again?

In the politics portion of this discussion I am certain it is the issue. In the other related portions of this discussion, I am not so sure yet.

 

[Andre]

Again, moral entrepeneurs are not sociopaths, I would think that the majority is socially involved, considerate, and convinced that there is a big threat looming. And they just have that mission, to save the world from that. They just want to do their share and make the world a better place to live in. They just have to dispose of that threat, even if it's the last thing they do.

Anyway in the case of that 17 years old desperate student, one can easily dismiss that. Adolescents cannot be considerated mentally stable. But how about professors? Kari Norgaard for instance?

 

[ThomasT]

Two more things, it's not so much the strong exploiting the weak, but the moral enterpreneurs cultivating fear to the crowd. Herd instinct makes them turn into believers and haters of the other side. That's the essence of the cause of WW-II.

I don't think that herd instinct is the best way, or even a very informative way, to characterize the essence of the cause of WWII, or any war for that matter. Just my current opinion.

The problem is that even if all of us had the courage to act according to our consciences, then, assuming that different socialization imparts different conscientious imperatives, then conflict is still inevitable.

And there remain those with no apparent conscientious imperatives -- an inordinate percentage of which seem to rise to positions of power. Just a particular take on things. But, if true, why is that? Is it because the actions of such persons aren't as constrained as those of persons of conscience?

 

[OmCheeto]

So now are we back to the sociopaths again?

In the politics portion of this discussion I am certain it is the issue. In the other related portions of this discussion, I am not so sure yet.

Eek!

Sorry.

The wolves are there, constantly intimidating us, watching for the weak one that is easy for the taking. Sheep aren’t fearful without the wolves. The wolves probably are sociopaths, but I won’t get into that now.

As the thread topic didn't strike me as being about the wolves, I ignored any comments about them.

But I think we should find a way to teach the sheep about wolves. By example perhaps.

No time today for me to give examples unfortunately.

--------------------------------
Ein, zwei, drei! Schlaff, zeit, ist, nei!
Bartender! Forget what I just said!
Ein andere boogeleise bitte! ;)

 

[Andre]

I don't think that herd instinct is the best way, or even a very informative way, to characterize the essence of the cause of WWII, or any war for that matter. Just my current opinion.

Don't forget that the motive of the leader of the national socialists, to go to war, was the "Endlösung". And the question here is, how did he manage to mobilize a complete nation to co-operate to do that. Obviously what he preached appealed to the population, it triggered their 'noble' (herd) instinct to free the world of an apparently terrible threat. See also Crowd psychology.

And obviously those who opposed were just in the way, and were being taken care of.

But I think we should find a way to teach the sheep about wolves.

Yes that would be great. One of the problems is that moral enterpreneurs usually do the teaching. They have a message to convey. Also they have a strong self-preservation mechanism, suppressing dissidence (see my signature).

I guess our hope is on communities like physicsforums where the ability to logical analysis may overcome gut feeling.

 

[ThomasT]

Don't forget that the motive of the leader of the national socialists, to go to war, was the "Endlösung". And the question here is, how did he manage to mobilize a complete nation to co-operate to do that. Obviously what he preached appealed to the population, it triggered their 'noble' (herd) instinct to free the world of an apparently terrible threat. See also Crowd psychology.

And obviously those who opposed were just in the way, and were being taken care of.



Yes that would be great. One of the problems is that moral enterpreneurs usually do the teaching. They have a message to convey. Also they have a strong self-preservation mechanism, suppressing dissidence (see my signature).

I guess our hope is on communities like physicsforums where the ability to logical analysis may overcome gut feeling.

Thanks for the links. I think I understand your points and your way of making sense of large scale conflict. That is, your statements make sense to me.

I agree with you that online communities like PF, with it's general requirements of documentation, logical analysis, and scientific verification are a good resource for getting at the truth of some things. However, some of the most controversial issues are barred from being discussed here, because it's not primarily a political forum.

The hope of most people, I'm supposing, is that the will of people who value liberty, equality of opportunity, and equality of justice will dominate the will of people who don't. Online communities might be a valuable tool in realizing that hope.

 

[Andre]

I agree with you that online communities like PF, with it's general requirements of documentation, logical analysis, and scientific verification are a good resource for getting at the truth of some things. However, some of the most controversial issues are barred from being discussed here, because it's not primarily a political forum.

Thanks Thomas, I'm happy that it makes sense.

About the barred subjects, it's okay that they are; knowing that moral entrepreneurs are most happy to unleash their powerful fallacies, when they are allowed to do so.

On the other hand it would be nice if PF could lend itself to solving logical issues, with a high political footprint, and then strictly heuristical*, within the scientific method using scientific ethics. Some issues from 1963, 1988 and onwards and 2001 appear to raise some legimate questions.
I realize that this is very sensitive. However, there is (are) forums with very restricted posting rules, with limited authorisations to guard against 'crackpots'.

edit adding

* heuristical: things like witness A says B, witness C says D. B and D contradict but B sounds gut feeling better however D is supported by evidence E, etc etc etc.

How to find your logical mathematical way in such a maze

 

[ThomasT]

Thanks Thomas, I'm happy that it makes sense.

A lot of what you've written makes sense. But I think I still must disagree with what I take to be your basic premise that everybody needs an enemy. I agree that the perception of a common enemy is a factor in uniting people, and that perhaps some sort of herd instinct or groupthink can be a factor, but I don't think there's any fundamental need, per se, to have or perceive enemies.

Regarding the genocide of Jewish and Polish people, I think that a majority of German people avoided, as much as they could, dealing with their suspicions about these things ... out of fear.

 

[Andre]

I agree that the perception of a common enemy is a factor in uniting people, and that perhaps some sort of herd instinct or groupthink can be a factor, but I don't think there's any fundamental need, per se, to have or perceive enemies.

Oh I would certainly not call it a hard law, do people need friends? Not per se. But the more you crave for friends / admirers, the more effort you will do to get them, and then you discover that telling people that there is a big enemy/threat to be feared, dragons, devils, outraged deities, other races, oil companies, aliens, the Orange Sox, asteroids, that they tend to listen and tend to admire you when you seem to know how to deal with that threat.

Regarding the genocide of Jewish and Polish people, I think that a majority of German people avoided, as much as they could, dealing with their suspicions about these things ... out of fear.

Yes, fear reigns. And when you tend to play whistleblower, you're likely told that the public may be so mad at you that your spouse and children may not be not safe.

There is another element to enemy image building and that is framing the opponent, giving the impression that the enemy attacked you (aka Inside Job), like the Reichtag fire. Obviously those notions are always heavily debated.

Other examples are
Emperor Nero burning Rome to frame the Christians,
The sinking of the USS Maine to lure to US to war with Spain.
The fake Polish attack on the Gleiwitz radio station to justify the attack on Poland

It is heavily debated if Roosevelt knew about the attack on Pearl Habor in advance and whether it was provoked or not.
Then there was Operation Northwoods, to commit acts of terrorism against the US and to blame Cuba.

There are many more

It seems that throughout the centuries we have learned how to create our enemies.

 

[mheslep]

Other examples are
Emperor Nero burning Rome to frame the Christians,
The sinking of the USS Maine to lure to US to war with Spain...

The cause of those two incidents is inconclusive, especially the burning of Rome.

There are many more

Many more events near mythological in character?

 

[Andre]

The cause of those two incidents is inconclusive, especially the burning of Rome.
Many more events near mythological in character?

So noted:...

...Obviously those notions are always heavily debated...

However Operation Northwoods was very unmythological.

. A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned
to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine
appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.

a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in
chronilogical order):

(1) Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.

(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence"
to stage attack on the base.

(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) sabateurs inside the
base.

(4) Start riots near the entrance to the base (friendly
Cubans).
... etc etc

 

[Andre]

Apparantly the planners of Operation Northwoods agreed with Nazi Hermann Goering as recorded by Gilbert during the post WW-II Nurnberg trials:

Gilbert(in his book): We got around the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

Göring: "Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship."

Gilbert: "There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

Göring: "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Now, operation Northwood, vetoed by the Kennedy administration, was declassified, almost by accident, but could there have been other top-secret false flag operations that have been carried out?

 

[Ms Music]

Andre,

Goring's statements are pretty potent! I think I will have to see how much info I can find about Gustave Gilbert.

 

[OmCheeto]

Andre,

Goring's statements are pretty potent! I think I will have to see how much info I can find about Gustave Gilbert.

I concur.

And I may have to retract my "make international friends on facebook" solution. Speaking with my Armenian friend, I've learned more than I wanted. What ugliness.

The Armenian massacre that inspired Hitler

And it just doesn't stop.

Nagorno-Karabakh War
The demand to unify with Armenia, which proliferated in the late 1980s, began in a relatively peaceful manner; however, in the following months, as the Soviet Union's disintegration neared, it gradually grew into an increasingly violent conflict between ethnic Armenians and ethnic Azerbaijanis, resulting in claims of ethnic cleansing by both sides.

bolding mine

Which somewhat reminds me of the semi-recent conflicts Kosovo. I've worked with Bosnians for over 10 years. They seem to tell a different story than what is commonly known.

And I shouldn't mention the assassination of Hrant Dink, but I will.

The stuff you learn when you venture down the rabbit hole. Simply amazing. Kind of makes me want to vomit.

 

[Ms Music]

There are times when I am embarrassed to be part of the human race. This is one of those times. And to find out about it almost 100 years later?

Can society as a whole ever get to the point where we don't kill our neighbors simply because he doesn't LOOK the same, or maybe has a different religion? Or to try to create enemies?

There are monsters that walk among us. I wish them gone.

One planet. One race. HUMAN.

PEACE.

 

[OmCheeto]

There are times when I am embarrassed to be part of the human race. This is one of those times. And to find out about it almost 100 years later?

Can society as a whole ever get to the point where we don't kill our neighbors simply because he doesn't LOOK the same, or maybe has a different religion? Or to try to create enemies?

There are monsters that walk among us. I wish them gone.

One planet. One race. HUMAN.

PEACE.

Paranoia.

Last night, I was sitting on my back porch watching the thumbed kitties play, when a monstrous doberman showed up out of nowhere, and stared me in the face.

Beautiful dog, but quit large. Shouldn't have been there.

I pulled the hedge shears out of the deck and started slicing air, as I stood up. The rust of the blades made a beautiful sound. I slowly approached the dog, stating; "you don't belong here", and it ran away.

I then went to the front porch, and discovered 2 young men standing next to their car in front of my house. The dog obviously belonged to them. The dog ran around the rest of the neighborhood.

I decided they were Turkish mafia, sent to kill me, for my violation of Article 301...

Paranoia, the destroya...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9ObLGRq33o

Peace be unto you also Ms. Music. I love music.

 

[Ms Music]

Just stumbled across an study that, although it is regarding the 2008 financial crisis, the data applies (I believe) to all scenarios that were brought up in this thread.

http://org.sagepub.com/content/18/2/173.full.pdf+html

Abstract
In this theoretically informed study I explore the broader cultural changes that created the conditions for the credit crisis of 2008. Drawing on psychoanalysis and its application to organizational and social dynamics, I develop a theoretical framework around the notion of a manic culture, comprised of four aspects: denial; omnipotence; triumphalism; and over-activity. I then apply this to the credit crisis and argue that the events of 2008 were preceded by an incubation period lasting for over two decades during which a culture of mania developed. Then, focusing especially on the Japanese and South East Asia/LTCM crises, I argue that a series of major ruptures in capitalism during this incubation period served not as warnings, but as opportunities for a manic response, thereby dramatically increasing the risks involved. I also argue that this mania was triggered and strengthened by triumphant feelings in the West over the collapse of communism. I suggest therefore that this manic culture played a significant role in creating the conditions for the
problems that led to the credit crisis.

 

[ThomasT]

Just stumbled across an study that, although it is regarding the 2008 financial crisis, the data applies (I believe) to all scenarios that were brought up in this thread.

http://org.sagepub.com/content/18/2/173.full.pdf+html

I think that the root cause it quite a bit simpler. We're generally selfish creatures. It's our human nature that serves us well wrt certain criteria, and is self-defeating wrt certain other criteria. Is there any reason to believe that humans have significantly changed during the course of recorded history? Is there any reason to believe that humans will significantly change in the future? I don't think so.