|
|
|
|
|
|
by userulluipeste
1898 days ago
|
|
|
"The only peace humanity every knew was within the border of some empire. Otherwise it was constant war." This is a bold claim on a very much debatable subject, where it would come down to what "war" is, if it is the same with armed conflict/incident (like opposing force against a robbery), and so on. There are many countries, even neighboring ones (like Serbia and Romania), that say that have never been in a war against each other. As to the commendation of living within an empire, that is just helplessness against empire's overpowering forces, which is far from the general idea of "peace" as in Wikipedia-defined "societal friendship and harmony in the absence of hostility and violence". |
|
|
No. It's not debatable. Show me an example of an extended peace between nations outside of the borders of an empire. This is almost a tautology to say that you need a central authority to have a monopoly of force. Otherwise you're in the 'tragedy of commons' scenario.
>There are many countries, even neighboring ones (like Serbia and Romania), that say that have never been in a war against each other.
Certainly they don't want to, but that's immaterial, they aren't allowed to. They are within the sphere of American order.
>As to the commendation of living within an empire, that is just helplessness against empire's overpowering forces, which is far from the general idea of "peace" as in Wikipedia-defined "societal friendship and harmony in the absence of hostility and violence".
Well ... OK ... that's all we have.