Source: Facebook

http://johnquiggin.com/2016/07/04/anti-militarism/I think those of us who study comparative civilizations take the opposite approach, and that is, that one of the reasons that western civilization has advanced FASTER than the rest, in each epoch, is precisely BECAUSE of frequent conflicts between smaller states. And that the central issue that has faced us since the french revolution, is the attempt to create massive states on the chinese model (meaning America and the EU) rather than continuing our western evolutionary process of religioous, philosophical, commercial, legal, and military conflict. Competition in the production of goods and services, in the production of commons, in the production of high arts, and sciences, is arguably impoverished by consumptive stability.

Lets look at the reasons for the great war: Napoleonic expansion of the fiat state, and the rest of europe’s reaction in defense of it. This caused the rise of germany out of the european heartland of three hundred princedom’s. The hansiatic germanic expansion in to estern europe had achieved on the continent what russia had achieved in the orient, and the atlantic nations in the new world.

Three great pressures built: First was the failure of the slavs to create a core state from either Lithuania or poland so that the eastern European civilization could rise to an enlightenment of their own. Second was Russian messianic expansion after the fall of the ottoman empire, and their attempt to restore orthodox civilization. Third was the fear by the UK that further expansion of Russia (or Germany) would result in an imbalance to the existing balance of powers.

Now, heterodox or not, because it conflicts with the self-congratulating western virtuous narrative, it’s pretty clear in hindsight that we were wrong to interfere with german attempts at expansion and in doing so we English speakers doomed western civilization because of our conversion from moral landholders to utilitarian mercantilists.

And that is what I ‘hear’ when you’re making the above argument: that you have not yet learned the lessons of history. That the law of diminishing returns occurs very quickly, over 10M people.

The eradication of the military elite from the government of the USA since the late fifties (for the first time in western history) largely at the will of the left, has in no doubt exacerbated the military industrial complex by removing the ability to alter policy to control it.

War is not bad, or good. Any more than Violence is Bad or Good. Any more than the proxy for violence we all democracy is bad or good. Democracy, War and Violence can be put to immoral or moral use.

The question is whether we put our efforts into moral or immoral uses.

The destruction of the family and the hybridization of cultures is not a good no matter how much consumption it produces – and we know that from the data.

But mainstream economists are very happy with their measures, and so they seek to expand their measures, without realizing this measure is a methodological selection bias.

We are not happier than we were in 1960.