What is war good for?

So long as the people consent to being owned and convinced that some people are better than others, they will be conditioned to do violence to each other, instead of their oppressors. Over the course of thousands of years, people have become congenitally stupid, generation after generation, committing mass murder for their feudal masters.

Neither of those books were written by native authors and native speakers are the people whose histories I repeat. Regardless of the validity of the claims of these authors, the warfare and brutality of most indigenous cultures pales in comparison with the genocidal savagery of European Judeo-Christian religious nationalists in their former colonies that , in most cases, goes on today.
Rubin is Hispanic. Chacon is a Spanish name, notably from....Mexico. They're both more indigenous that you are could ever hope to be. Keep moving those goal posts old man.

By the way, they both specialize in Native American warfare.
 
You know Tom this thread had potential bein' all topical and on point...and then you fucked up by adding your own conspiracy theories and rhetoric thus removing any semblances of 'mature discussion'. You used it as an in just to spew your nonsense.
You do this all the time.
Do you not see the pattern?
Would you expect anything less? Tom can be counted on to make the worst choices possible no matter the situation. Get six figures of inheritance? Waste it. Know of a girl who's getting raped by her 'partners'? Join in. Post in a forum where, despite all odds, people actually give good advice? Shart all over it like he sharts his pants. Tom is a prime example of the worst our species has to offer. The most positive impact he has on this world is that he gets scammed by people who while they are probably scumbags, they're better than he is.
 
Richard Chacon is far more of an ally to indigenous peoples of the Americas than you ever were or will be:

Dr. Richard J. Chacon is a Professor of Anthropology at Winthrop University who conducts anthropological research throughout the Americas. He documented the subsistence patterns and belief systems of the Yanomamö of Venezuela, the Yora of Peru, and the Achuar (Shiwiar) of Ecuador. Additionally, he investigated the traditional belief patterns of the Kuna of Panama. He studied ritual violence among the Otavalo and Cotacachi Indians of Highland Ecuador. He analyzes natural resource utilization among the Haida of British Columbia. His specializations include subsistence strategies, optimal foraging theory, conservation, natural resource utilization, warfare, ritual violence, native beliefs, leadership, collective action, inequality and the rise of social complexity, long distance exchange, secret societies, ethnohistory, and the effects of globalization in addition to analyzing the impacts of missionization on indigenous peoples. He has a special interest in encouraging members of minority communities to pursue higher education. He currently serves as Editor for Springer's Conflict, Environment, and Social Complexity (CESC) Series. He also serves as Editor for Springer's Anthropology and Ethics Series. He co-organizes the “Warfare, Environment, Social Inequality and Pro-Sociability” (WESIPS) Biennial Conference in Seville, Spain. His publications include: Trade Before Civilisation: Long Distance Exchange and the Rise of Social Complexity, eds., J. Ling, R. Chacon, and K. Kristiansen, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (in press). Feast, Famine or Fighting? Multiple Pathways to Social Complexity, eds., R. Chacon and R. Mendoza, New York: Springer (2017). The Great Awakening and Southern Backcountry Revolutionaries. Co-authored with Michael Scoggins. New York: Springer (2014). The Ethics of Anthropology and Amerindian Research: Reporting on Environmental Degradation and Warfare, eds., R. Chacon and R. Mendoza, New York: Springer (2012). North American Indigenous Warfare and Ritual Violence, eds., R. Chacon and R. Mendoza, Tucson: University of Arizona Press (2007). Latin American Indigenous Warfare and Ritual Violence, eds., R. Chacon and R. Mendoza, Tucson: University of Arizona Press (2007). The Taking and Displaying of Human Body Parts as Trophies by Amerindians, eds., R. Chacon and D. Dye, Springer: New York (2007). He was a Visiting Scholar at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden in 2016 and 2018.

Incidentally, if you actually read the intro to what is a edited collection of essays, the point of that book is specifically to push against the notion of the peoples of north America as primitive pacifists, instead according them their martial past as part of their civilization, and recognizing that it is equivalent to the warfare and military histories of Europe and Asia. Among the authors included in the book are:

Clipboard Image.jpg


AND

Joan A. Lovisek, who was instrumental in the repeated assertion of treaty rights by the Grassy Narrows First Nation.

Among many other scholars respected by indigenous people for their efforts in preserving and illuminating native cultures.


Tom, in reducing the complex histories of the Indigenous peoples of the Americas to simple Eden-dwelling noble savages, you are doing exactly what you worthless hippies have always done, reducing and belittling the natives you steal from culturally because it provides you an escapist fantasy not unlike Hogwarts for you to retreat into.
 
Aren't you supposed to be familiar with biology Tom?

There's two possibilities to maintain population equilibrium; either organisms have to die or they have to not reproduce.

If neither option occurs a population expands to the limit of its resources, depletes them, then experiences a complete collapse and everything dies. The earth has limited space and limited resources, and the rate at which we're using them is increasing exponentially, not linearly. The population of the planet has tripled in just the last 70 years.

The rosy utopia you're suggesting is not an option. If war doesn't separate the strong from the weak, then pandemic or environmental catastrophe will.

So long as the people consent to being owned and convinced that some people are better than others, they will be conditioned to do violence to each other, instead of their oppressors. Over the course of thousands of years, people have become congenitally stupid, generation after generation, committing mass murder for their feudal masters.
Ok, I know you've gotten used to being a member of the welfare class, but how the real world works isn't that there's always some shadowy "oppressor" who's hording all the resources who you just have to whine at enough until they give you what you want.

But I guess that's really the internet leftist attitude summed up right there: the road to success isn't about self improvement and fostering strength and camaraderie through shared struggle, it's just about working together to find the right pinata to smack until all the goodies that mommy and daddy are keeping from us come tumbling out.

And just an aside, you probably wouldn't be so averse to competition if you actually took some pride in personal development rather than only doing whatever feeds your ego in the short term, since then you wouldn't suck at everything like you do now.
 
But I have and in North America, there is only one pre-Columbian massacre site that is known. Most intertribal conflict was thought to be no more violent than a polo match. This changed with colonization as eastern tribes allied with colonizers against rival tribes whose territories they were being pushed into.

So long as the people consent to being owned and convinced that some people are better than others, they will be conditioned to do violence to each other, instead of their oppressors. Over the course of thousands of years, people have become congenitally stupid, generation after generation, committing mass murder for their feudal masters.

Neither of those books were written by native authors and native speakers are the people whose histories I repeat. Regardless of the validity of the claims of these authors, the warfare and brutality of most indigenous cultures pales in comparison with the genocidal savagery of European Judeo-Christian religious nationalists in their former colonies that , in most cases, goes on today.
Thomas don't you have a date with a rope and a tree?
 
And just an aside, you probably wouldn't be so averse to competition if you actually took some pride in personal development rather than only doing whatever feeds your ego in the short term, since then you wouldn't suck at everything like you do now.
The world would be a complete shithole if humans had no reason to compete. We wouldn't have a reason to better ourselves and would quickly die off. It's...it's almost like it's some form of gradual development of a person to improve themselves and/ or those around them...an "evolution" if you will.
 
The world would be a complete shithole if humans had no reason to compete. We wouldn't have a reason to better ourselves and would quickly die off. It's...it's almost like it's some form of gradual development of a person to improve themselves and/ or those around them...an "evolution" if you will.
Imagine if life never got past the sponge state because it just worked, you know?
 
It's for killing off surplus males. With most animals you just need a few high quality males and a lot of females. If all goes well, all the paedo dogfuckers of each warring state kill each other and we're left with a few Chads to share.
The sex that invests less energy in the gamete has to compete to prove its fitness. That's the rule. That way a big chunk of the species can die in resource conflicts and not affect the breeding population that much. It's also probably why men are more prone to genetic mutation. easier to generate novel traits without compromising the viability of the whole population, because females can easily avoid the deformed males, and successful males can breed with several females.

That's you Tom. You're the seagull with the dull yellow beak. The peacock with the sad, thin tail with feathers missing. Women know to avoid you because deep in their genes, they know your inferior seed is a genetic dead end.
 
Fine, I'll bite.

First, war is good for resource acquisition. If you have something I want, I have four options: do without, get it elsewhere, negotiate with you for it, or take it by force. It's the same with nations, and if many nations feel they can sue force without consequences, they absolutely will.

Second, war is good for defense. Those who wage war will always slaughter those who don't. It's a simple fact of life, and you're always welcome to prove me wrong by flying to Ukraine and trying some Flower Power on the Russians.

Third, it's good for business. Manufacturing and supply chains have a ready market (the army) and an endless supply of volunteers to labor long hours- for the good of the country, naturally. War is a Jew's delight.

Finally, war is a form of natural selection. Much as animals and insects slaughter the weak so the strong may thrive, humans butcher the inferior members of the species so the superior (white) humans can prosper.
 
You know Tom this thread had potential bein' all topical and on point...and then you fucked up by adding your own conspiracy theories and rhetoric thus removing any semblances of 'mature discussion'. You used it as an in just to spew your nonsense.
You do this all the time.
Do you not see the pattern?
i see a pattern of reactionary intellectual dishonesty and generalizations from you. be specific about these conspiracy theories and actually debunk them if you can.
Well damn, he can write a logical take without getting off topic. Good for you, seriously. Marked improvement.

Anyways, I'm native. We used to rape and pillage each other. Sure, warfare violence was ocassionally settled through coup ritual but warfare isn't just killing. Ever hear of the rape of Nanjing? Anyways, women were stolen and traded amongst Cree, Inuk, etc. The main exception being the Iroquois who had a distinctly matrilineal, woman-led society and even they still took slaves.
Is that well documented in pre-colonial legend? There were a lot of bloody rivalries that occurred between tribes who aligned with different colonial powers. i would also imagine shitty weather conditions contributed to intertribal conflicts among those nations, just as i'm sure there were violent criminal elements among all nations. The Commanche were cannibals. yes, some kept slaves and still today there's a lot human trafficking. Still, there is no evidence of mass murder other than the one site at Sand Creek, SD.
 
i see a pattern of reactionary intellectual dishonesty and generalizations from you. be specific about these conspiracy theories and actually debunk them if you can.

Is that well documented in pre-colonial legend? There were a lot of bloody rivalries that occurred between tribes who aligned with different colonial powers. i would also imagine shitty weather conditions contributed to intertribal conflicts among those nations, just as i'm sure there were violent criminal elements among all nations. The Commanche were cannibals. yes, some kept slaves and still today there's a lot human trafficking. Still, there is no evidence of mass murder other than the one site at Sand Creek, SD.
Shut up Thomas you have no clue about what you are talking about.
 
Back