Human Nature And Culture Being Responsible For Warfare

attitude....Complete destruction of Poland is the military aim. To be fast is the main thing.

“The Cause of War” is a book written by Australian author Geoffrey Blainey. The book is a collection of studies from wars since 1700’s and it analysis the relation of rivaling nations. The book is divided in four parts it starts discussing the weakness behind the current theories of peace, it then moves to talk the “ingredients” which are key for a nation to determine whether they will go to war or not. Third part of the group is about some misleading theories of war, and the last part just deals with the variety of war.

Instinctivist theories on human aggressiveness often promote the notion that warfare is in the nature of humankind and therefore cannot be prevented. However Margaret Mead eloquently refuted this idea in her renowned essay Warfare: an Invention – Not a Biological Necessity. Mead states, “War is inevitable unless we change our social system and outlaw classes, the struggle for power, and possessions; and in the event of our success warfare would disappear, as a symptom vanishes when the disease is cured.” Through this statement Mead makes it clear that because aggression and subsequently warfare is a learned invention, it can be avoided. For the purposes of this essay, aggression will be defined as “a response that delivers noxious stimuli to another organism.” This essay will outline how and why aggression, and thus warfare, is not biological and is rather a behaviour that is learned as a reaction to social stimuli. Furthermore, it will be explained that violence is used by societies as a political weapon to achieve ostensible objectives.

In war, what sets one side apart from the other is innovation. How one side utilizes resources as well as how they think about a given situation both play a huge role in determining the outcome of a conflict. Humanity’s unique ability to think critically and manipulate available resources is what gives us the edge in innovative combat. Historically, each innovation branches off of the last, up until the original human innovation. Wayne Lee argues in the introduction of his book, Waging War: Conflict, Culture and Innovation in World History, that human evolution was in fact this first innovation. Human warfare began with our original biologic desire for resources, and continued as human’s social evolution and innovations grew to support the

In 1914-1919, the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was the cause of World War One, resulting in conflicts between Austria-Hungary and Serbia. In the Great War, No Man’s Land was a dividing field from the opposing trenches located in France. Soldiers were forced to cross the land to push forward their side of the battle, to either take control or defend the territory. Gas was often used in the trenches to wipe out large groups of soldiers at a time. During the battle, soldiers would come across harsh conditions such as disease, treacherous terrain, and the passing of men. Soldiers sent into war experienced hard decisions and tragedies which can change their mentality. In the story, The Wars Timothy Findley develops the idea that when an individual faces dilemmas in life, one’s innocence can vary due to a person’s human nature.

In addition to altering alliances, the basic destructive capacity of guns significantly altered the nature of warfare between tribes, as described by a Saukamappee youth in comparing two battles, the first of which predates the introduction of guns, in which he stated “on both sides several were wounded, but none lay on the ground; and night put an end to the battle without a scalp being taken on either side, and in those days such was the result, unless one party was more numerous than the other.” and continues to describe a battle after the introduction of guns : “the battle had begun about Noon, and the Sun was not yet half down, when we perceived that some of them had crawled away from their shields… The greater part of the enemy took flight, but some fought bravely and we lost more than ten killed and many wounded; Part of us pursued, and killed a few, but the chase had soon to be given over, for at the body of everything Snake Indian killed, there were five or six of us trying to get his scalp or part of his clothing, his weapons, or something of his as a trophy of the battle. ”(Friesen,38). Friesen characterized the pre-gun warfare as rather benign, stating that “Shields were adequate to defend against arrows, offensive tactics were static

War is a human endeavor. Humanity continually pursues solutions to counter evolving threats with the end of preserving power while also enabling peace. Civilizations resort to war to maintain their perception of this equilibrium. Defined threats and adversaries have changed throughout history, however, the essence of human nature and the base concept of conflict itself have not. Carl von Clausewitz’s theories on warfare capture the relationship between humanity and its application of war, remaining relevant in today’s era through their pensive explanations of timeless philosophical principles regarding the concept of war. These theories regarding war in politics, the key factors affecting war, and the extent that war is applied are inherently interconnected, providing insight on the relationships between humanity and its application of war.

“The Tragedy of war is that it uses man’s best to do man’s worst” wise words from Henry Fosdick. When it comes down to the time where an individual hits rock bottom, a man either do its best or do its worst. Although, Man can do its best and do its worst at the same time. There are many reasons how man’s best can result to man’s worst. Henry Fosdick statement is both true and false.

Most poets use their unique gift of writing poetry to relieve stress or just to document their emotions towards a given subject. Others use it as a key to bring about social change and voice their opinion on modern events. This is the case in Stephen Crane’s War Is Kind. The speaker in the poem uses irony as a strategy to convince the reader of the harsh reality of war.

The purpose of this essay is to inform on the similarities and differences between systemic and domestic causes of war. According to World Politics by Jeffry Frieden, David Lake, and Kenneth Schultz, systemic causes deal with states that are unitary actors and their interactions with one another. It can deal with a state’s position within international organizations and also their relationships with other states. In contract, domestic causes of war pertain specifically to what goes on internally and factors within a state that may lead to war. Wars that occur between two or more states due to systemic and domestic causes are referred to as interstate wars.

War has been going on just about as long as people have been alive. Whether it is just some cavemen fighting over a fire, or multiple countries going to war for justice, there has always been some scale of war. I am going to be analyzing way through functionalist, conflict, and symbolic interactionist perspectives.

Political Violence has been affiliated with governments and nations since the beginning of political history and plays a huge role in the causes of Wars around the world. What causes leaders to declare war? Many philosophers have based their studies and theories on this question; many have different perspectives. One philosopher, John Stoessinger, has expressed his theories on the causes of war through what he calls his “misperception framework.” Stoessinger shows great interests in the personalities of world leaders; he is less impressed with the roles of abstract forces such as nationalism, militarism, economic factors, or alliance systems as the causes of

The company Enron was formed in 1985 after two natural gas companies, Houston Natural Gas and InterNorth merged together. Kenneth Lay, former chief executive officer of Houston Natural Gas was named CEO of Enron and a year later, Lay was assigned to the chairman of Enron. A few years later, Enron launched a website to allow customers to buy stock for Enron, making it the largest business site in the world. The growth of Enron was rapid; it was even named seventh largest company on the Fortune 500 list; however things began to fall apart in 2001. (News, 2006). In the third quarter of that same year, Enron posted an enormous loss of over $600 million in four years. This is one of the reasons why one of the top executive resigned even though he had only after six months on the job. Their stock prices fell dramatically. Eventually, Enron filed for bankruptcy protection. This caused many investors to lose money they had invested in the company and employees to lose their jobs and their investments, including their retirement funds. The filing of bankruptcy and the resignation of one of the top executives, also led to an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Committee, which proved to be one of the biggest scandals in U.S. history. (News, 2006). All former senior executives stood trial for their illegal practices.

The question is: is war a part of our biology or is it a cultural phenomenon?

Talking about war tends to make people feel emotional, feel a sort of adrenaline rush, mad, and even proud. These emotions can at times, in my opinion, bring groups together and separate others because of disagreements on views and beliefs. While it is not easy to talk to anyone about delicate topics such as this one, it is important to acknowledge how war can influence societal behavior and culture. Many can argue that war unites people, particularly speaking of the United States; a country is known for its patriotism and pride when it comes down to its military forces and achievements across nations.