Re: [Fwd: Re: virus: The Root of All Unhappiness Lies in Yourself.]

XYZ Customer Support (
Mon, 30 Dec 1996 22:34:25 -0700

> From: Alexander Williams <>

> Observe: We take two groups of humans. One is pacifistic, one warlike.
> We turn them loose on the same continent. The pacifistic group spreads
> relatively slowly, without desire for more than they need. The warlike
> group will spread quickly and factionalize when the population reaches a
> high enough point. Let's have them come in conflict for the same
> resources: the pacifistic group is either killed or enslaved by the more
> agressive and warlike group. Why? Because they didn't have the means
> of /stopping the occurance/. It doesn't matter even if their
> agricultural skills are the result of hundreds of years of peaceful
> practice, the war-using group will appropriate that knowledge in the
> process of subjugation.

An obvious contradiction to this is the Chinese. Reletively pacifist during
the time of the mongols. The mongols were never defeated they
were absorbed into the Chinese culture. They just disappeared.

> > When has any war ever been the "best" thing that could have happened?

> That entirely depends on how much you like using the Net. It /was/
> originally the product of wartime and war-planning technology, you know.

That still doesn't answer the question. The net could have been
invented during peace time as well, but like I said before, modern
man is just a caveman with an atomic bomb instead of a club.

> > Are you saying that in those circumstances you couldn't imagine
> > anything "better"? War is not the best of anything.

> Better for technological development? I can't think of anything.

You need a better imagination then.

> > Is racial or ethnic cleansing also right up there with the "best of the best"?

> Can be, if you're in the genetic group doing the cleansing of another
> group and your genes eventually dominate their niches. Humans,
> cockroaches and rats.

I can imagine you right now, worshipping Hitler, Saddam, and Ida
Amin since they would agree with you whole heartedly.

> > We don't need competition and war in order to create progress.

> We /do/ need competition to produce progress at a rate that may leave us
> in a position to adapt to rapid changes, however. Look up the ALife
> research regarding "Ramps," a simulation that bred `organisms' that
> sorted numbers. Without predation, Ramps leveled off its evolution
> short of perfection, doing `just enough to get by.' With an active
> parasitic predator, Ramps /soared/ its population fitness. The
> competition forced more strategies to be tried and thus, more successes.

No, not I don't need that and I am making progress.
You like being an opportunist and a racist and I won't even consider

> > this world of competition and "winning the war" is everything. I would never
> > want to believe in that and I don't understand how anyone with a
> > heart would want to either.

> Survival and evolution isn't about having a heart. Its about having
> more offspring reproduce more often.

It is about being more fit...not having the most offspring.

> > Technology, strength of will, courage, and persistence are not
> > developed much more efficiently in war than in peace. It is just

> Making the bald claim without any support is unlikely to carry much
> weight, y'know.

Look at the dates for many of the inventions and discoveries in the
last fifty years.

> > challenge to develop these qualities and anyone who thinks that
> > killing men, women, and children is "the only way" or "the best
> > way" has obviously lost touch with reality. Are you saying that

> Who is to define `contact with reality,' and by what? If results are
> the medium, history shows far more effect of war as The Great Motivator
> than any amount of kindness.

I hope someone kills your kids and your wife, just to show you how
much better their genes are than yours are.

> > war has never sapped people of their strength of will, has never
> > sapped people of their courage or turned them into chickens,
> > drained people's patience, or hindered technology?

> Peace has done all of the above as well. When the sum of the game is 0,
> you have to expand your view.

But you prefer war and I prefer peace.