Welcome to the Kitopedia. All entries are © 2001-2007 Christopher Sunami, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved. These entries are NOT publicly licensed. No entries may be reproduced without permission and attribution.
NOTE: Most essays on this site represent original theoretical work. If you find these articles interesting, inspiring or helpful, please let me know. If you refer to them, please give me and this website credit. In addition, links back to this page in blogs or from other sites are always appreciated!


Search



Forums


New Articles

Updates
•Websites 7/12/08
•Mandelbrot Set 6/24/08





Hero For Christ

War



Why does war exist, and can it be eliminated?

By Christopher Sunami, 12/2/04



War is a direct and inevitable result of two ideological trends: Materialism and anti-Individualism (Conformity). Wherever these two ideologies coexist, war is sure to follow.

The causality is easy to trace:

Materialism:

When one Materialist society comes in conflict with another, the only way to resolve that conflict is in a Material fashion --through one society expressing physical dominance over the other. Therefore, war is the natural Materialist response to an ideological threat.

For example, when the United States of America was attacked (physically and ideologically) on September 11, 2001, the response was to marshal a display of overwhelming physical force --the so-called “shock-and-awe” offensive.

Conformism:

Conformism creates another kind of motivation for war. Because of the natural individuality of human beings, a conformist society will have a continual need to repress, expel and destroy deviant internal elements in order to retain its uniformity. However, such methods may eventually prove insufficient, at which point, the conformist society will “project” its own unacceptable negative traits onto a foreign population. The outbreak of war, under such conditions, channels internal conflicts and hostilities into an external conflict, thus creating unity at home at the price of bloodshed abroad.

Often, in a war between two conformist societies, both are actually externalizing a largely internal conflict. This is the same process described by African philosopher Franz Fanon as “objectification of the Other” and is closely analogous to the ancient Biblical practice of “scapegoating,” where the entire community’s sins would be invested into a goat, which would subsequently be driven into the wilderness.

Although the terrorist Osama Bin Laden has directed attacks on many different nations around the world, it is likely that his real objective is much closer to home --to replace the relatively moderate, secularized governments of putatively Islamic nations like Egypt, Turkey and his native Saudi Arabia with more extremist, conformist Islamic theocracies.

In response, the willingness of the American public to substitute one villain (Saddam Hussein) for another (Bin Laden) suggests that the true goal, from a psychological standpoint, was to respond to internal doubts, not external threats.

Can war be stopped?

To paraphrase Plato, every evil is the result of the dysfunctional pursuit of some good and useful end. The overall goals of the societies above are beneficial. In the case of the Materialist societies, the aim is to determine the superior worldview. In the case of the Conformist society, the aim is create unity and strength at home. If these goals can be met in a more effective and less destructive manner, then war will lose much of its powerful appeal. In general, what is needed is
  1. a compelling and convincing way to for ideologies to prove their superiority, without relying on physical dominance
  2. a way to create strong and unified communities without conformity
If those two conditions can be met, then war can be stopped.

Substitutes For War

So are there superiority-proving substitutes for war? Some possible answers:

  • The Olympics

    One of the most promising alternatives to war, the Olympics has probably played a role in defusing world hostilities at points during its tenure. However, the results are too ambiguous, the events too arbitrary, and the relationship of the athletes to the ideology of the nation they represent too tenuous to make this a true testing ground for rival worldviews.

  • The World Cup

    Another leading athletic candidate, the World Cup has an advantage over the Olympics in providing a single uncontested winner, but falls prey to many of the other Olympic disadvantages. In addition, the World Cup is nearly ignored by America, the most significant modern nation.

  • Trade Wars

    This is a workable solution in theory, but in practice trade imbalances are too often backed up by military force to make this a real alternative to war.

  • Cold War

    A cold war is simply a situation where two nations are too evenly matched to risk an open confrontation --a postponement of the problem of war, rather than a solution to it.

  • Culture Wars

    The influence of popular culture is often underestimated. American pop culture played a substantial role in establishing America as a dominant force in the world, and is often cited by other countries as an example of American “imperialism.” However, the results of the culture wars are ambiguous. Does American pop culture dominate because of its quality, or because of American marketing and merchandizing power? If it is the latter, than the culture wars are really just a part of the trade wars, and thus implicated as a shadow counterpart to the “hot wars” of Materialism domination.

    However, there have been other culture wars than those of modern times, and two in particular prove instructive. During the days of the expansion of the Roman Empire, the Romans amassed a large army that allowed them to physically dominate their opponents. But a major portion of their successful assimilation of conquered nations was their sophisticated and advanced culture of art and technology. The conquered peoples were so impressed by Roman culture that they were eager for the chance to become Roman citizens, and thus unlikely to rebel.

    An even more interesting example of the use of culture was during the successive Chinese dynasties that followed Confucian philosophy. Confucian culture was peaceful, and so the Chinese empire was continually conquered and re-conquered by warlike barbarian tribes. But the Confucian aesthetic was so advanced that each new wave of invaders would quickly become assimilated into the preexisting Chinese culture.

    In the case of the Romans, an advanced culture aided the cause of the conquerors. In the case of the Chinese, the culture was even stronger --it was able to overcome superior military strength, so that the conquered people emerged the victors.

    This outlines the way for one worldview to conquer another without war or use of force --through the creation of a clearly and unmistakably superior culture and aesthetic.

    Interestingly enough, this also provides an avenue towards eliminating the second cause of war. If a society is invested deeply enough in the arts, than artistic production can be an avenue towards expressing and channeling individual difference, as an alternative to suppressing it or projecting it onto a foreign population.


©2004 Christopher Sunami. All Rights Reserved.

See Also:

  1. Peace
  2. Dream+War
Comment on this Page or Read Guestbook