World wars are government vs government fights, generally speaking. Why do these governments have millions of followers, instead of being ignored like they should when they start wars?
Because of the ideology of nationalism (or patriotism, as it's called in the US and UK).
We've been told we're part of this "team", so if the team wants to go to war, you'd better support it! That's why calling someone "anti-American" is such a tremendous threat socially, because everyone is tripping over each other to see who can support the state the most.
We even have it in our language. We say "The US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq". But in reality, it was not "The US". The land itself did nothing. The people who live in the US generally had nothing to do with the initiation of those wars. It's the government, and the people who support the government even when it's irrational and immoral.
If the government didn't have legions of supporters, there would be no wars, or at least the wars would be much smaller scale.
We're tricked in to thinking identifying ourselves with our nation is our truest identity. People say "I am an American" before they say "I am a Kansan" or "I am a Christian" or whatever identity they have. In modern society, nationalistic identity takes priority. This best serves the existing power structure. It gives them the power to conduct wars and commit crimes in the open. They are above reproach due to nationalism.
This is further compounded by people who submit to the groupthink of a political ideology, be it right or left. They won't scrutinize the wrongdoings of their own team, and they act as though the other teams are causing all the problems. We do this on a scale of nationalism, and on a scale of party politics. And on many other scales too.
Detaching from this web of ideologies is how we unplug from the matrix, how we regain our freedom and stop giving away our power to those who want to control us. People are all too happy to outsource their thinking to an ideology without realizing the full consequences. The less you subscribe to any ideology, the more powerful and aware you are as an individual.
view the rest of the comments →
llegendary ago
War isn't about borders, it's about resources and how those resources are distributed. Limited resources with increasing populations will always mean there will be conflict, with or without borders.
Those with weapons will always be at the top of the world order and those without will be at the bottom.
Your thinking is along the same lines as the gun control issue. It would be nice if everybody would give up their guns, but, some are going to keep them and will use them to influence the world around them in their favor.
People will always form groups to influence their power. Asking them not to or thinking that people will do so is magical thinking.
magnora ago
The borders are the mechanism by which we think wars are justified. They don't matter except as a moral construct to goad people in to supporting certain warmongering behaviors.
This defeatist attitude of "oh it doesn't matter, we might as well not even try to look at what are the big causes of war" is the reason they can keep getting away with wars. Seriously.
llegendary ago
Borders are what they use now. If it isn't borders, then it would be something else. This group vs that group. This union vs that union. People will form groups to increase their resources and influence. That has always been and always will be human nature. Asking everybody to be neutral is like expecting a snake to agree not to bite you.
magnora ago
Yes it may be human nature, but we should be discouraging this groupthink instead of encouraging it, as our culture does. People don't realize that nationalism is like a trick being played on them, and they should.
llegendary ago
Nobody is ever going to play by those rules.....and I like being American. I personally hate the idea of open borders and a global society. People will always be different. If I excape this country, I want to be able to go to another. One world rule would lead to an iron fist of inescapable rule. Who knows who would set the rules, well....the ones with the guns would set the rules and be privileged and would be part of their own little group. No...your idea would never ever ever work.