Is it always? I'm asking genuinely, not rhetorically.
As an example, let's look at the American War of Independence. You could say that the Founders were motivated to instigate the rebellion by a primal desire to increase their own status as elites, but do you believe that their faith in the revolutionary ideals they espoused was mere façade? Do you suppose that elites that instigate war have a biological imperative to do so that is subconscious, and at the same time they can wholly believe the narratives they purport, consciously?
The inquiry into motives ultimately boils down to the question: can war ever be good?
For the sake of the argument, "good" is defined as: "anything that facilitates eugenic development."
In the case of the example, I would say that it was good that the war was fought and its conclusion afforded the people of the U.S a little more freedom. The death toll of young men is obviously dysgenic, but the ones left standing (which were the vast majority) benefited a lot as a direct result of the war, which is why I consider it 'good.'
15MAR 0 points 1.4 years ago
Is it always? I'm asking genuinely, not rhetorically.
As an example, let's look at the American War of Independence. You could say that the Founders were motivated to instigate the rebellion by a primal desire to increase their own status as elites, but do you believe that their faith in the revolutionary ideals they espoused was mere façade? Do you suppose that elites that instigate war have a biological imperative to do so that is subconscious, and at the same time they can wholly believe the narratives they purport, consciously?
The inquiry into motives ultimately boils down to the question: can war ever be good?
For the sake of the argument, "good" is defined as: "anything that facilitates eugenic development."
In the case of the example, I would say that it was good that the war was fought and its conclusion afforded the people of the U.S a little more freedom. The death toll of young men is obviously dysgenic, but the ones left standing (which were the vast majority) benefited a lot as a direct result of the war, which is why I consider it 'good.'
What are your thoughts?