[lit-ideas] Re: On the prospect of World Peace
- From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Lit-Ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 14:34:54 -0400
RP: It's a funny but also a sensible list, and one thing it
shows is that wars are usually overdetermined and causes
assigned to them according to the shapes of historians'
spectacles.
Mike's list is not sensible although it is funny. For
example, Simon proposed economic redistribution on a grand
scale as a prerequisite to world peace, since wars often
have economic causes. Simple cultural differences--think the
Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda--also lead to war and genocide.
War being the natural state of affairs, peace has only been
the result of a superior force or a decisive defeat.
Apparently, you don't think the decisive defeat of the
seceding states in the US Civil War explains why the US
states are at peace, since you cite Andreas' question as to
why US states aren't at war. Under force of arms, imposed by
a subordinating federal power, all the states have abandoned
the notion of independence and see themselves as part of the
same country. There are still some militias out there in the
hinterlands that view the federal government as the
Oppressor, but they are routinely crushed by federal power
as needed.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
