The Long Peace: 1945 - Present

mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Yes I can see how you can view more or less violence as more or less violent acts but we all do consider proportion even if it doesn't appear that way.

Take the Ukraine situation, when the riots started, as an example.

I'm sure most of us were appalled by the situation, but generally speaking, we didn't really consider the totality of violence in that situation as an atrocity.

Another example: I'm pretty sure everyone on that Malaysian flight is most likely dead but people are generally more focused on the reason for the plane's disappearance than those lost lives.

Why?

It's because we realize that violent acts will happen with lower magnitude than in the past.

And that can only mean a more peaceful existence for most of us.
 
L Gilbert

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
mentalfloss said:
Yes I can see how you can view more or less violence as more or less violent acts but we all do consider proportion even if it doesn't appear that way.

Take the Ukraine situation, when the riots started, as an example.

I'm sure most of us were appalled by the situation, but generally speaking, we didn't really consider the totality of violence in that situation as an atrocity.

Another example: I'm pretty sure everyone on that Malaysian flight is most likely dead but people are generally more focused on the reason for the plane's disappearance than those lost lives.

Why?

It's because we realize that violent acts will happen with lower magnitude than in the past.

And that can only mean a more peaceful existence for most of us.
Click to expand...
That I can handle. But the OP says that violence was reduced. It's misleading. I'd bet that violence has actually increased but at a lesser rate than the population has increased.
 
Nuggler

Nuggler

kind and gentle
Feb 27, 2006
11,596
140
63
Backwater, Ontario.
I thought Pinker was practising stand-up and was pretty good. Nah. Shows to go ya.

What about all that unreported crime and violence, Pinker, Eh!! What about that. He loses his comedy licence.
Just another BS'er.
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Nuggler said:
I thought Pinker was practising stand-up and was pretty good. Nah. Shows to go ya.

What about all that unreported crime and violence, Pinker, Eh!! What about that. He loses his comedy licence.
Just another BS'er.
Click to expand...

How much unreported violence would you expect?
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
A bit more from an executive summary that I've been glossing over recently.

“So, what explains the trend of major powers fighting fewer wars of shorter duration over the past 500 years? Well, to begin with, as we saw in the section on the Civilizing Process, this period witnessed a decline in the number of states, as small fiefs and manors gave way to larger and larger nations.

Fewer states means fewer rivals which means fewer wars (p. 235). But as we also saw in the section on the Civilizing Process, this period simultaneously witnessed a shift from a time when the only way to increase one’s wealth was to increase one’s territory, to a time when wealth could be generated through the far less bellicose practices of trade and commerce. This in itself led to more trade and less war between nations (p. 237), which trend has only increased as global commerce has become ever more prevalent (and global commerce has indeed exploded since the end of the Second World War, during which the Long Peace has held sway).

Another factor contributing to the reduced frequency of war between the major powers over the past 500 years has been the increasing separation between church and state in the West. Indeed, as we have seen, religion has been used less and less as a legitimate ground for going to war, so this in itself has contributed to fewer wars. In fact, the increasing separation of church and state *may also partly be responsible for the decreasing length of wars. This proves to be the case “since wars based on religion, like all wars of ideology, make all parties less likely to engage in or make advances through diplomacy, and more likely to make the parties keep fighting beyond the point when the evidence shows it is a lost cause (p. 234, 237).”

Excerpt From: A. D. Thibeault. “An Executive Summary of Steven Pinker's 'The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined'.” iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.

Check out this book on the iBooks Store: https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewBook?id=834277620
 
EagleSmack

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
coldstream

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
There's and illusion of Golden Age of History from post WW2 to present of peace, prosperity and 'tolerance'.

It is in fact a delusion. The West has been in a state of disintegration since the early 70s.. economically, morally and culturally that will erupt in violence, Depression, global war and cultural dissolution in the near future. It has been in the sphere of the American Empire is a CONSTANT state of low grade War.

We have decade or two maybe of this illusory nirvana.. although we already see encroaching poverty, crime, polarization of wealth in the death of the middle class. It'll only get worse. We are not at the 'End of History'. History is about to lash back with avengance, and a new Dark Age.
 
Last edited:
petros

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,417
11,458
113
Low Earth Orbit
Additional insight is gained by studying modern hunter-gatherer societies. Those studies have shown that there are about 524 violent deaths per 100,000 in those societies, compared with an overall rate of violent death in the 20th century of about 60 per 100,000.
Click to expand...
By modern hunter/gatherer are they suggesting Injuns and other dirt worshipping heathens?
 
T

The Old Medic

Council Member
May 16, 2010
1,330
2
38
The World
Civil wars are, throughout history, some of the bloodiest wars possible.

Let's look at just a few of them:

The British Civil War, pitting the Royalists against the "Parliamentarians". Several tens of thousands died in that war, and for the many years afterwards while Cromwell was the "Protector".

The American Civil War, between the Confederacy and the Union. No one really knows how many people died, but the estimates range from >500,000 to well over a million. There are fairly good records of the military men that died, but nothing was recorded of civilians that were killed directly, or by the Unions virtual total blockade of the South's ports.

The Russian Civil War, between 1917 and 1923. Well over 15 million died in that war, and many millions more died in the aftermath. The Ukraine alone lost more than 5 million people in the forced famine of that area.

The Chinese Civil War, which ran from the 1920's to 1948 (with somewhat of a truce during World War II). The best estimates range from 30-70 MILLION people that died directly or indirectly during that war. Then, you have the approximately 80 million killed by Mao's government between 1948 and 1989.

The ONLY reason why the percentage of people dying has gotten lower is because of the massive increase in the worlds population since 1900. The population has grown by an estimated 400-600% during that time frame.

As far as the "Great Powers", no they have not directly fought in any wars.

BUT, they have used surrogates, over and over and over again, to fight their battles, and push their philosophy. The primary reason why the great powers have not directly fought each other is that all of the have Nuclear Weapons, and there is absolutely no expectation that the first country to utilize them will survive the counter attack.
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Locutus said:
*watches the door for BL*

:lol:
Click to expand...

Wut BL?

EagleSmack said:
Impossible!
Click to expand...

Non-state societies did have a higher rate of violence, yes.

One of the criticisms levelled at modern societies is the fictitious notion of honour. It explains why the southern states are typically more violent than the northern states. The southerners took more time to get out of 'I challenge you to a dual' mode, where dudes would get into gun fights because their honour was at risk.

Later in the book, Pinker shows how catastrophe during the Cuban missile crisis was averted because both Russia and U.S. avoided a game of saving face.
 
Tecumsehsbones

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,651
7,103
113
Washington DC
mentalfloss said:
Wut BL?



Non-state societies did have a higher rate of violence, yes.

One of the criticisms levelled at modern societies is the fictitious notion of honour. It explains why the southern states are typically more violent than the northern states. The southerners took more time to get out of 'I challenge you to a dual' mode, where dudes would get into gun fights because their honour was at risk.

Later in the book, Pinker shows how catastrophe during the Cuban missile crisis was averted because both Russia and U.S. avoided a game of saving face.
Click to expand...
As I said waaaaay up there, nukes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom