A question of philosophy... Some people say that we should aspire to peace and prosperity in the world. That fighting and aggression is without reason. Is this a valid claim, or is it contradictory? It feels like a valid under a set group of ideal conditions, meaning that everyone possess the resources to live a life without undue suffering. Our present world is far from ideal. For instance, the US says it would like to see all nations rise to its level of prosperity and achieve a lasting and world peace. However, is this really a reasonable or valid claim. At the moment, many of the world’s nations- perhaps more than half- are far below the US's level of prosperity, or even that of what we would call modern countries, like Britain or Germany. And despite this, there is already a struggle over resources in the world. If everyone in the world rose to the US's level of technological development, it would mean they would become a proportionate draw on the resources of the world, escalating a problem of the feasibility of the sustainment of civilization. It seems reasonable that for everyone to experience an equivalent lifestyle while not being a harmful draw on the resources of the earth- beyond the scope of reparation- that while some countries grow in stature, other countries would somehow have to reduce the totality of all kinds of consumption in order for overall balance and stability to promote the sort of world stability it would imply. And, of course, there can be no aggression. The military proves to be one of the biggest draws and the expediters of environmental imbalance and destruction known. But...if there isn't enough resources, and such peoples or countries would need those resources to develop and survive, then it would inevitably create stresses on demand that would lead to war. So... Do you think the theory of total world economic and social prosperity possible, and if you do or don't, please explain why or how that is.
You have a zero-sum way of looking at the world, and I will not be able to convince you that economics doesn't work that way.
There will always be armed conflict, with large nations picking on smaller ones. But there are simply too many people in the large countries for them to go to war against each other. If we went to war against China we would have to kill 800-900 million of them. We have the means to do that but not the guts. They could attack us but they don't have the means to occupy us. Plus they will be processing all of our chickens. There's no upside for either the US or Russia to fight since both would suffer fatal wounds. There's no reason to attack India since it processes our call center work. Plus it has nothing that we need. It already sends us gasoline.
You think oil will replenish itself forever? Will there be no fights for very limited potable water sources? When we double from 7 billion to 14 billion people will resources be irrelevant?
Technology does not die (unless big government kills it). Eventually, through the innovation of the free market--oil depletion will not be a factor. The water we use today is the same water since earth began. It won't run out. Again...innovation and technology from the free market will offer solutions to those areas that don't have access to water. 7 billion to 14 billion will be an easily sustainable population...and frankly in order for innovation and techology to continue---we ought to increase our birthrate here in the U.S. Wars won't end, evil won't end, greed and hatred won't disappear until Christ comes back and creates peace.
When Jesus returns he's going to create a theocracy, kill all life on Earth and destroy the planet. Most of humanity will try to stop his evil ways.
No. Actually Satan will be bound and put a way...unable to create his chaos and the world will live in peace...for 1000 years.
Yes, I think world peace and prosperity are possible, eventually. I don't think it is possible at this stage in our evolution.
Nope, I know the prophesy. Its how I said it. Now...after the 1000 years of peace are up, then Satan is let loose and has another go, we have total chaos before he is put away forever and one world ends and another begins.
Since the prophecy never came true during the lifetime of the prophet who said it there's nothing to worry about. He was just another liar and nutcase.
As I said before, there will always be small conflicts. But there won't be any major wars between the large countries. The big countries will pick on the small countries.
You have no basis for that assumption. I could assume that the United States will lose its power and influence...leaving open a vaccuum for a larger more aggressive country or group of countries to take over as much world as they can. Eventually small countries from each side band together and there you go...world war 3.
Same water, but we make more and more of it undrinkable, try to spread it out over larger populations while privatizing it and restricting access to it. The "free" market is what is keeping water access limited, not expanding it. It is your moronic idea that the market system will provide for the many, rather than do what it was designed for; enriching the fortunate few. Since you have abandoned hope here in this life, your myopia allows you to barge forward with no concern for this planet. Most of the world suffers now. 14 billion souls will self destruct. But that's ok with you. It doesn't matter anyway, right? - - - Updated - - - And you can't wait, can you?
In order to have a meaningful WWIII a country must have the means and will to kill at least 1 billion people. A coalition of small countries does not have the means to do that. The US, Russia, and China have the means but they don't have the will or the reason. They may have the will and the reasons for causing conflicts in smaller countries around the world but they will never directly attack each other under any circumstance. The most damage that any of the smaller countries can do is to get off one shot and then they will get the crap stomped out of them. If Iran ever builds nukes it may be willing to use them on Israel even though it will suffer retaliation itself. That's because it can easily destroy Israel with six good sized nukes. Chances are millions of Iranians will survive which will give them the win.
If you follow the historical pattern humans are improving their ability to cooperate in large numbers , from families to clans , from city states to kingdoms , from empires to nations, from countries to international bodies , sooner or later mankind will be able to cooperate as a whole and the age of war and misery will be over .
As humans our evolutionary tool for survival is our intelligence. As such it creates an interesting variable in our evolution because it makes us aware of it. Time is born from our consciousness serving as a theoretical path leading from the past to the future, both of which are intangible concepts. Most people move along this path without even recognizing the present because it is lost behind the clutter of either trying to rectify the past or creating a successful future. I bring these concepts up because I think this is where a lot of our distress comes from. As individuals and as societies we work diligently to find our way back to the present moment as in once we have achieved some set of goals we will finally be able to enjoy the present. We are cognizant of the problems caused by the past and current state of the human condition but can we remove any of it without corrupting all of it? Can we learn without making mistakes? Can we improve without failing? Can we become the fittest without testing ourselves? None of this is to suggest we are incapable of ever creating a much better world it is simply to say we are bound by a process we cannot forcibly change without corrupting. In the moments we see the failures of our nature we long for an abrupt change that is out of our reach, in this sense our intelligence is both a gift and a curse.
