A world without war? | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

A world without war?

Do you believe war will one day become a thing of the past?


  • Total voters
    30
I want to believe we will live in a world without war. I think we Have to believe it to stop war. I don't know when, but I think it will be possible when the capitalist system comes to an end, and I am sure it will soon.

Firstly, I think the word "incorrect" doesn't have any place in this discussion sinse it's a hypothetical discussion. There is therefore no "correct" or "incorrect". Also, I haven't said there will be no war, I said: I want to believe there will be no war.

Then there is this word: "nation". I think "nation" is what inflames war, the idea of a unit unlike other units. Nation allienates and separates cultures. "Nation" was created during the late 1900 century, and the strive to create these units were (according to Uppsala university) the reason for the first world war (I know this is only one of many theories). And what use does "nation" have? I believe it's about belonging, and economic gain, trade.

Yes, there were wars before capitalism, before consumerism, even before mercantilism and barter. But my hope is that we will learn from history and understand that war comes from thirst for power and wealth. I hope we will go back to the mercantilism system, where we trade with surplus, rather than produce to trade. I also hope we can leave this insane idea about "nation". I feel it brings nothing than suspicion for other cultures.
Like Stormy1 says, there will always be conflict, but I hope for a world without violence.

Ummm what. Of course you can be wrong when speaking hypothetically. I also laughed at the part where you implied capitalism starts wars.

Humans start wars.

Nothing else.

Source: Communist Russia murdering the shit out of all the world besides America
 
  • Like
Reactions: bamf
Ummm what. Of course you can be wrong when speaking hypothetically. I also laughed at the part where you implied capitalism starts wars.

Humans start wars.

Nothing else.

Source: Communist Russia murdering the shit out of all the world besides America

To be wrong or right you need to have the the key answers, and in these discussions there are no such thing as one straight answer, this field is subjective. Everyone reading the question will understand it differently, in this case: because we define war differently, and how we see the world depending on culture and experience affects how we answer. It may be possible to have a right answer when it comes to math, 2 +2 = 4, except from that I believe there are few fields where such a thing as the right answer excists. If we knew how we could end war, there would be no war. And if we knew war could never be ended, then we could just lay down and die. I believe what I believe because I need to have faith, in my education, in my intelligence and in humanity that we can make things change.

Also, is capitalism som higher force created by god? No, capitalism was created by us, by humans. So yes, we are on the same page: humans does start wars. Also, I am not stating capitalism is the soul reason for war, in my posts you can read it is also the want for power that creates war, I would say that goes well with your example.
 
And what society do you believe I am a product of?

And in what way am I projecting hate towards capitalism? Of course there is no perfect system, but it's clear capitalism doesn't work, and it's well known it won't work for ever. The whole system is based on the fact that it will eventually collapse, to find an example you can open any newspaper to learn that Europe is in massive trouble because of the present economy. We can also learn from history that this is a very new system, if it's wavering after roughly hundred years, it's time to move forward. Why stay with a system that doesn't work?

In my analysis I feel there is a clear connection between want of power and wealth and war. That is why I state the capitalist system has to change and give way for simple trade or mercantilism.

Scandinavian society.
 
Scandinavian society.

I have no idea how you understand the Scandinavian society, in fact I didn't even know such a thing excisted. Could you explain how this society works, and how I am a product of it?
 
I have no idea how you understand the Scandinavian society, in fact I didn't even know such a thing excisted. Could you explain how this society works, and how I am a product of it?

Well, your train of thought does not deviate from the stereotypical Scandinavian person.
It seems that your culture has had a huge impact on your thinking, which is quite interesting, but a bit predictable too.
 
Well, your train of thought does not deviate from the stereotypical Scandinavian person.
It seems that your culture has had a huge impact on your thinking, which is quite interesting, but a bit predictable too.

You still haven't answered my question how you understand this Scandinavian society, but like you already stated, your impression of me emmanates from a stereotype. I suggest you go back to topic and leave your loosely based ideas about me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jill Hives
If it does ever happen, it won't be for hundreds of years. I think the main problem is that while society has evolved man hasn't.
 
You still haven't answered my question how you understand this Scandinavian society, but like you already stated, your impression of me emmanates from a stereotype. I suggest you go back to topic and leave your loosely based ideas about me.

Everyone has stereotypical ideas of things, honey. I don't see the point in acting as if identities aren't socially constructed, but alright.
Scandinavian society is quite socialist, and you seem to fit that with your anti-capitalism.

I pointed it out, as I find it interesting how culture influences one's thinking.
Loosely based? There's tons of research out there about the connection between nation and attitudes.
 
honey.jpg


This is honey. Any questions?

Scandinavian society is quite socialist

Sweden is not socialist. According to the World Values Survey and other similar studies, Sweden combines one of the highest degrees of individualism in the world, solid trust in well-functioning institutions, and a high degree of social cohesion. Among the 160 countries studied in the Index of Economic Freedom, Sweden ranks 21st, and is one of the few countries that increased its economic freedoms during the financial crisis. …Sweden wasn’t always so free. But Sweden’s socialism lasted only for a couple of decades, roughly during the 1970s and 1980s. And as it happens, these decades mark the only break in the modern Swedish success story. …The Swedish tax burden was lower than the European average throughout these successful 60 years, and lower even than in the U.S. Only in 1950 did Sweden’s tax burden rise to 20% of GDP, though that remained comparatively low. …The 1970s were a decade of radical government intervention in society and in markets, during which Sweden doubled its overall tax burden, socialized a slew of industries, re-regulated its markets, expanded its public systems, and shuttered its borders. In 1970, Sweden had the world’s fourth-highest GDP per capita. By 1990, it had fallen 13 positions. In those 20 years, real wages in Sweden increased by only one percentage point. …By the late 1980s, though, Sweden had started de-regulating its markets once again, decreased its marginal tax rates, and opted for a sound-money, low-inflation policy. In the early 1990s, the pace quickened, and most markets except for labor and housing were liberalized. The state sold its shares in a number of companies, granted independence to its central bank, and introduced school vouchers that improved choice and competition in education. Stockholm slashed public pensions and introduced private retirement schemes, keeping the system demographically sustainable. These decisive economic liberalizations, and not socialism, are what laid the foundations for Sweden’s success over the last 15 years. …Today, the state’s total tax take comes to 45% of GDP, from 56% ten years ago. Meanwhile, unemployment benefits, sick leave and early retirement plans have all been streamlined to encourage work. The number of people receiving such welfare—which soared during the socialist decades—has fallen by 150,000 since 2006, a main reason for Sweden’s remarkably sound public finances.
http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/do-you-like-swedish-models/

Your first assumption, that Sweden is "quite socialist" is false, sweden is as capitalist as any other country. Then you go ahead and state that since a person lives in Sweden, by definition likely will be socialist. Sweden ranks higher than the US in individualism, and 9/10 of the Swedish population defines itself as liberal, according to polls.

Anti capitalism does not correlate with "I like soviet" no matter how many times people say it. Most people who say it just don't like the thought of endless economic growth until there is no planet left, or anti capitalism as in "we should give people a strong social security net so that people who need help should get it" or how about "I don't like 1% of the population to own 40% of the resources, we should have a fairer divide."

I'd say nationalism is a bigger problem than capitalism when it comes to war however.
 
When aliens invade we will stop killing each other and start killing them instead
 
This is honey. Any questions?




http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/do-you-like-swedish-models/

Your first assumption, that Sweden is "quite socialist" is false, sweden is as capitalist as any other country. Then you go ahead and state that since a person lives in Sweden, by definition likely will be socialist. Sweden ranks higher than the US in individualism, and 9/10 of the Swedish population defines itself as liberal, according to polls.

Anti capitalism does not correlate with "I like soviet" no matter how many times people say it. Most people who say it just don't like the thought of endless economic growth until there is no planet left, or anti capitalism as in "we should give people a strong social security net so that people who need help should get it" or how about "I don't like 1% of the population to own 40% of the resources, we should have a fairer divide."

I'd say nationalism is a bigger problem than capitalism when it comes to war however.

1. Socialism does not necessarily = collectivism.
2. How the Swedish population defines itself says little about their actual system, more about the perception of it.

I don't mind being corrected, but at least give it a decent shot goddamnit. Do you have any questions about that?

The amount of flaws in my logic was unbelievable, but so there was in yours.
I was just pointing out that people are products of their culture.
 
Yes, clearly I believe I have "moral high ground" over you using what is very obviously patronizing language and stating the obvious as such, sweetheart.

That sucks I guess if my use of the word "asshat" offends you. I somehow very much doubt if I had chosen a different adjective it would have been any less off putting to you though.
 
Yes, clearly I believe I have "moral high ground" over you using what is very obviously patronizing language and stating the obvious as such, sweetheart.

That sucks I guess if my use of the word "asshat" offends you. I somehow very much doubt if I had chosen a different adjective it would have been any less off putting to you though.

It's just silly that you think you can correct a wrong by doing something wrong yourself.

You calling me out for using patronizing language, but then calling me an asshat, kind of makes you a hypocrite.
 
Oh, but are we not all hypocrites? Just as we are all products of our culture, right my darling?
 
Oh, but are we not all hypocrites? Just as we are all products of our culture, right my darling?

Not really, there's no connection between the two.

But I can see why you would want to justify your behaviour. It's okay though, I don't mind that much.
 
Yeaaah, you don't get it.
 
Yeaaah, you don't get it.

I do, but I find your justification quite irrational. I get what you're trying to do here, I simply don't agree with you.
There's a difference between the two.

Frankly, I don't care much about this. I'll be leaving this topic for people who want to discuss this seriously.

(If anyone wants to reply to what I've said, you can send me a private message or leave me a visitor message.)

Edit: I should add that I do not agree with the way I voiced my opinion. I erred towards [MENTION=5172]Lavendel[/MENTION], that is true, and I want to offer my apologies to her.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We will always have war. I think that is pretty self evident. I dont want us to stop having it either.