Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by overfeed 297 days ago
> I was hoping that there would be a "solution" of sorts to tackle / handle this issue of when EVERYBODY seems to use this strategy, but perhaps there isn't one...?

We're overdue for a major war, which will be reset on how we treat other humans by the end of it. Humans killing humans on an industrial scale between near-peers is followed by periods where people realize that maybe being dicks to each other isn't the ideal state. More cantankerous politicians being elected only increases the odds of war breaking out due to diplomatic failures.
2 comments
3D30497420 297 days ago
I'm not sure history bears out that major wars lead to peace. WW1 led pretty directly into WW2, and after WW2 there were plenty of conflicts by major powers. That major powers didn't start WW3 (to date) probably has more to do with the potential consequences threatened by nuclear war than an increase in human aversion to widespread industrial war.

There's probably an argument for European countries specifically not wanting to return to the near-constant warfare across its history. But I'm not sure that holds for US v USSR (which came perilously close to open warfare several times), or conflicts elsewhere.

link
snapcaster 297 days ago
What are you talking about? can you point to a single instance of this happening? 20th century seems to contradict you pretty hard
link
overfeed 297 days ago
Germany (WWII), Japan (WWII), and US (Vietnam war) all had pacifist movements spring up in the aftermath of conflict. See also the aftermath of the regimes of Franco, Mussolini,and Ceausescu for domestic resets, just from the 20th century.

All in the 20th century. I attribute the fact that the US and Russia didn't head into a hot war post-WWII to the clear-headedness of witnessing WWII.

link