Can Humans Live in Peace?

[Seditious]

I think that this would apply to any culture.

A peace under any dominance would be awful. Unless you were in charge, on the 'A' team.

it wouldn't be so bad if it was under liberty though, it might not be great for all, but it wouldn't be fuckin awful like under this american theocracy


Switzerland needs to conquer the world

 

[OldScratch]

it wouldn't be so bad if it was under liberty though, it might not be great for all, but it wouldn't be fuckin awful like under this american theocracy


Switzerland needs to conquer the world

American theocracy? Capitalist Neo-Zionism with a stifling evangelical Christian twist...Strange bedfellows or two-thousand years of Asiatic ideology finally come full circle?

 

[Norsemaiden]

couldn't Hitler have secured us this peace? So long as anyone is beyond strong opposition that threat goes away and the reigning tyranny lives in harmony, peacefully putting women back in the kitchen, or blacks back on the cotton fields, or gays back in hiding, or children in silence, or whatever...

again, this merely 'no threat' peace sounds horrible to me---I hope Israel or China or somewhere remains to challenge the supremecy of the USA, because a peace under their dominance would be awful.

While being warlike is a Germanic trait, so, ironically enough, is the tendency to be a pacifist. This pacifism comes as a reaction against the warlike tendency. In Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler says

anyone who wishes that the pacifist idea should prevail in this world ought to do all he is capable of doing to help the Germans conquer the world; for incase the reverse should happen it may easily be that the last pacifist would disappear with the last German. I say this because, unfortunately, only our people, and no other people in the world, fall prey to this idea.

The pacifist-humanitarian idea may indeed become an excellent one when the most superior type of manhood will have succeeded in subjugating the world to such an extent that this type is then sole master of the earth.

So, first of all, the fight and then pacifism.

But Hitler, nevertheless, takes the Nietzschean view that no one should not seek to escape the fact of life that struggle (of one kind or another) is eternal and necessary to maintain the health of the species.

 

[blazzagath]

war is good. peace is weak and feminine. one day we will build a world without women. extermination!!

hailz!

 

[Seditious]

war is good. peace is weak and feminine. one day we will build a world without women. extermination!!

hailz!

how homoerotic.

 

[Έρεβος]

A relative peace would be good. I suppose it's just that one doesn't want to feel that one is under threat from other tribes wiping out one's own tribe. That's a very unpleasant experience.

Perhaps as long as there are different groups encroaching on each other's territory or threatening to, there will be conflict, but this could be avoided with either careful management and low populations or else resolved by one group of people wiping out their competitors.

Struggle is something to enjoy, but only when there is a chance of advancement, not when it is hopeless and only ruination seems to be the inevitable outcome.

Genocide is something entirely different. Such need for domination/extermination nearly always comes from a desire for "peace." Take a look at Christianity's spreading of God's love. =)

 

[AgoliantLives]

The most violent modern movement is multiculturalism. Forcing races who want to preserve their gene pools and cultures to coexist will always lead to violence.

The most violent political movement is communism. Communsim uses multiculturalism to create a one race, one class, one religion, one culture world.

Tolerance goes against human instinct.

 

[AgoliantLives]

Why is that a problem? They're preserving their culture.

Why can't they preserve their culture in their own country? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

 

[Vimana]

how homoerotic.

Seeing the word "homoerotic" makes me Hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobic.

 

[NikeGoddess]

Yes, humans can. That is if humans learn to respect others' beliefs, orientation, and existence.

 

[bogert]

I think the word Peace indicates Heaven Blowtus!

 

[AllShallFall]

Yes, humans can. That is if humans learn to respect others' beliefs, orientation, and existence.

This is impossible, as the past has shown. The human race is not going to change positively at all

 

[Summerian]

The unknown - fear - war
With our planet becoming ever smaller with technology and what not, we will be less inclined to wage war.
Today fear of being without natural resources might be our biggest problem when it comes to war. But oil will run out regardless of who owns it and water shortage isn't that much of a problem. Things aren't looking bad...
EXCEPT!
Can humans resist the allure of sociopaths?
There will always be people around willing to tell people what they want to hear in exchange for power.
When people grow up and finally learn that, there will be peace.
Sociopath (Psychopath) - These people are incapable of feeling empathy. The biology just ain't there.(!)
Are they human?
Profile of the Sociopath
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
http://www.youmeworks.com/sociopaths.html
Some researchers say about one percent of the general population are sociopaths. Others put the figure at three or four percent.

1. Learn to find them.
2. Figure out how to make them all right in the head.
3. Let them walk among us with the same rights as everyone else.
But till then we are all in danger. Positions with great power attract sociopaths. Police, judges, military and politics. You name it. If the position can get the sociopath power over others, it's of great interest.
The damage can be unbelievable.

 

[monoxide_child]

the answer is, no, we can not

 

[Finality]

Can humans live in peace? If we define peace as a state of non-war, then I would certainly say no, unless the entirety of humanity were under one, totalitarian regime. And even then, there would be factions vying to overthrow it, corporations battling over resources, and religious bigotry.

I'm with Hobbes on this one. The natural state of existence is perpetual war. We are always trying to one-up our enemy. You want the green mushroom? Too fucking bad, we're taking it!

 

[Norsemaiden]

I understand it now. Peace is only ever a temporary situation, a truce basically. It is important to know this because we must be mentally prepared for peace to end. It will be very soon now.

The problem is that when we don't understand this the peace is lost by a catastrophe and/or by the wrong side spoiling it. If we understood peace as a "truce" we would guard it so much better and would not now be heading for a time of sadness and suffering as looks imminently inevitable.

 

[Haddock666]

If there were no armies, there would not be wars.

 

[Kozak]

I don't think you need armies to have wars.
People can't even comment on forums or youtube with out it turning sour (into war if you like).
Wars have been and will be almost always a result of greed or religion.
On a smaller scale it usually because of egos or lack of controlling emotion.

 

[CiG]

You forgot ideology.

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

Can humans live in peace? If we define peace as a state of non-war, then I would certainly say no, unless the entirety of humanity were under one, totalitarian regime. And even then, there would be factions vying to overthrow it, corporations battling over resources, and religious bigotry.

I'm with Hobbes on this one. The natural state of existence is perpetual war. We are always trying to one-up our enemy. You want the green mushroom? Too fucking bad, we're taking it!

i concur with this^^^
humans can't live in peace
it's just not going to happen