I believe in a world without war. Is that so wrong?

[Taverner]

I remember in the 80s, one of my teachers had an "Imagine the World Without War" sticker. I didn't think such a thing was possible.

Knowing more now, I realize it is possible - probably not in our lifetime, but the abolition of slavery was not possible in the 1700s either.

Work towards a world without war.

[FarCenter]

1. On the other hand, pessimists are rarely disappointed

[Unvanguard]

2. No. Nothing at all wrong with it.

Just don't think (not saying you do) that we can get there unilaterally.

[teddy51]

3. I absolutely believe in a world without war, but have no idea what that is.

Being 63 years of age, I really have a hard time remembering a time when we haven't been at war. In fact, I am of the opinion that we should change our Department of Defense to Department of Offense since GW Bush was President.

[amerikat]

4. I will fight no more forever.

truth.

[Taverner]

8. Aye

[Electric Monk]

5. Why do you hate America?

:sarcasm:

[Spider Jerusalem]

6. Sure, it's possible.

Only because we have the means to make humanity extinct as a consequence of our actions, one way or another. That's the only thing that'll end war: extinction.

[mainer]

7. Never was. Never will be. We're at the most peaceful time in history.

Or so says Steven Pinker. And I think he's right.

http://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0670022950/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1318990639&sr=8-1

[Taverner]

12. Good. Do you see a trend? If so, keep up the trend.

[inna]

26. dead wrong. We're exponentially worse than anything in human history,

capable of destroying this entire planet many times over. More militarized than EVER, what's so hard to grasp about that unfortunate but simple fact?

[mainer]

34. The facts? 15% of prehistoric deaths were homicides

So how can you say we're more homicidal than ever? According to Pinker, it's the existence of "the state", i.e. laws and governments, that keeps our homicidal tendences under control.

Yes, we're capable of destroying the planet many times over. But fewer of us are being massacred than in times past.

[Soylent Brice]

9. fuck war

[Gregorian]

10. It's the 1%'ers who start the wars. But it's the 99% who fight them.

In my opinion, the answer lies in not fighting their wars. People don't get it. There is a disconnect. I still see flag waving and uniform loving even on this forum. I just don't get it. Put on a uniform, and you are doing the work of the 1%.

This is the dilemma. There will be Hitlers. But if Hitler's men didn't do his work for him, we would not have had to liberate camps full of suffering.

I think the important context of the OWS is that WE ARE THE ONES. We have the power. We hold the power to lift our lives out of the inferior places. And we have the power to say no to the wars. I can almost use that Nancy Reagan phrase here and not feel odd about it.

[Scuba]

29. Bingo. Virtually all wars are fought for economic interests. n/t

[Amonester]

11. When it's not us, it's someone else...

There's always been somebody at war.

Whether it's civil, economic, country vs. country (or countries vs. countries).

100% peace never really existed throughout History.

And now, add the global war against this planet (one the planet is winning, so far).

[Taverner]

13. Then let's make it happen

A world without war

[Amonester]

23. I guess we, as a living species, have no other real choice...

It's either a world without civil, economic, sovereign, and environmental war$, or it's no inhabitable world at all, and quite rapidly also.

The Earth is winning: thousands of species disappear each year, oceans get more acidic each year, the ozone hole is still expanding, clean water is diminishing, floods kill more and more tens of thousands, droughts set forests ablaze, hurricanes and typhoons get more violent, as do twisters, ice caps are melting....

We'll also have to 'make peace' with Gaia... and start repairing the damage done, otherwise, we will go the way of the dinosaurs.

[cowcommander]

14. Conflict is part of human nature, unfortunately

I don't think you can have a world without war without changing the fundamental aspect of what it means to be human.

[Taverner]

16. Both can change

That is, what it "means to be human" and us shooting each other for stupid shit

[Cleita]

15. I hate to burst your bubble because I agree with you.

However, slavery is alive and well in many parts of the world and underground in this country. I hope one of these days that we can have a peaceful and just world for all.

[Hydra]

19. Hell, slavery still exists here!

But someday, maybe...that won't be considered an admirable thing.

[xiamiam]

17. i believe in the same thing..it is not wrong..nt

[Hydra]

18. Do you know who believed in your idea?

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.

In an interview with Gilbert in Göring's jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)

Lots of people here on DU revile me for what I have to say about the Nuremberg Trials...but I think when I read this I felt a sense of hope for the first time for our species.

We DON'T naturally go to war. We are spurred to war, we are shepherded to war, we are ideologically trapped into going to war.

What if we threw a war...and nobody came?

[NutmegYankee]

20. Ironically, we don't have a world without slavery.

It still occurs around the world, though mostly underground. And sadly, human nature and disagreements or fights over political power and resources will never give us a world without war. It's about as likely as a world without farts.

[scheming daemons]

21. In the entire existence of humans on this planet, such a world has not existed

But it doesn't hurt to try.

[Taverner]

22. My point exactly nt

[azul]

24. No. It is the path of survival now.

'Did you see them, did you see them?
Did you see them in the river?
They were there to wave to you.
Could you tell that the empty quivered,
Brown skinned indian on the banks
That were crowded and narrow,
Held a broken arrow?"
-Neil Young

[Blue_In_AK]

25. It's been my dream my whole life.

I was born into a Quaker family; peacemaking is in my blood. :hippie:

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[canetoad]

28. It's not wrong but it won't hapen

That breaks my heart.

Humans, being the flawed creatures that they are, will always, however temporarily, allow a loud, grasping bully to dictate the social norm.

Change human nature, eradicate greed and power lust - then we may have a world without war. Until then.....

I need to edit this to add:
Wars happen when people are polarised. Your American political system is ripe for polarisation of the citizens. When half the population are warmongers - what do you expect? In Oz we have penalties for hate speech, in the USA the haters are lauded for their 'free' speech. I know where I'd rather live.

[LWolf]

30. No. It's exactly right.

When governments work for the 99%, war will become obsolete.

[kentauros]

31. I think this ties in with an idea I've had in recent months

with regards to military spending. Instead of funding new aircraft carriers, why not build more hospital ships for the same cost? Train our combat engineers in rebuilding after natural (and man-made) disasters. Train "special forces" in Search and Rescue. Be the first and biggest responder at the site of any disaster, and able to render help (no more fiascoes like with Haiti and being "unable" to have direct access to shore.)

We use an enormous number of our creative minds devising new ways of killing. What could they accomplish if they were tasked with finding new ways of saving people?

[The2ndWheel]

32. Not wrong, it just takes war to get there

You have to figure out who gets to monopolize the violence before you can stop the violence.

[pipi_k]

33. It's a nice thought but...

when you consider some of the reasons WHY we wage war on each other, it's probably unreasonable to expect that a world without war will ever happen.

How are we going to stamp out fear or greed or love of power or mental illness...all causes, directly or indirectly...of war?

How?

Shit...even here at DU people can't even go one week without engaging in verbal battles with each other.