War Is The Oldest Social Facts

It is evident that two countries were primed for conflict, however, which side ignited the first initial blow, resulting and inflicting the ideology of War”.

Action from necessity is a constantly recurring theme in Thucydides’ The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War. A sentiment used to explain the growth of the Athenian Empire which some Athenians espoused to an assembly at Sparta best quantifies necessity, “. . . we were necessarily compelled at first to advance the hegemony to where it is—especially by fear, and then by honor, and later by benefit.” (Selected Passages 1.75.3). This claim, referred to as the Athenian Thesis, is used to advance the two following implications: all states act with the motivations of fear, honor and interest and no one can condemn a state for doing so. The Athenian Thesis influences the way many of the Athenian elite structure their patterns of reasoning in both noticeable and subtle ways.

I agree with the quote that “Wars between states can be explained by the distribution of power and capabilities in the international system.” Power distribution among all the great powers plays an important role for the stability and economy of the state. I believe that war determines who will govern the international system, and whose interests will be primarily served by the new international order.

In order to test this hypothesis properly, multiple steps and measures needed to be taken to ensure the data procured was not only accurate but also pertinent to the study. The first of these steps was to establish a standardized definition of what actually determines what is and what is not an interstate war. In this study, an interstate war is classified as being a conflict between two or more states in which at least one thousand battlefield deaths occur. It should also be noted that at least one hundred of these deaths must be incurred by each state that is participating in the conflict. This helps to differentiate war from other violent acts such as massacres or genocides.

Charles Tilly’s article “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime” creates an analogy between the creation of European states and acting out an organized crime. Earlier in our course, we learned about Max Weber, who defined a state as “a human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.” Tilly argues that the word “protection” in relation to physical force has positive and negative connotations, leading to illegitimate use of power during the period time that Tilly is discussing. Tilly’s analysis eventually tells the reader that war is always a major part of state politics; specifically that war making and state making are interdependent.

The war was really impacted and made more deadly by the creation of new weapons that killed quicker and more efficiently.

This war, which lasted for four years instead of its intended four months, marks a paradigm shift in the concept of warfare. Benefiting from the Industrial Revolution, this conflict was to shape the following century. Interestingly enough, this clash of super nations was expected to be “The War to End all Wars.” These nations believed that war was inevitable for the prosperity of Europe and the world. However, from a contemporary perspective, this is erroneous. The changing of warfare, the Treaty of Versailles and the reluctance of many nations, made it impossible for

Over the course of human existence, war has been used as a way to support group’s or nation’s ideas for proof that they can fight for what they believe in. After going through the process of war, many people suffer tremendous lose or do not agree with the politics which can cause people to split into two different groups, pacifists or militarists. One examples of this come from two different authors, a militarist by the name of Friedrich Von Bernhardi and a pacifist by the name of Margaret Meade. Both of these authors believe in different ideas and with Bernhardi’s source, “War a Biological Necessity”, and Margaret Meade’s source of “On War” this essay will compare and contrast their colliding ideas to inform the reader about which author they

Throughout much of the history of civilizations, states have declared war for land, valuables, and resources. In the course of the mid-20th century and the 21st century, ascendant super powers have invaded foreign lands for resources such as oil, and weapons companies have profited from the ongoing cycle of war these super powers promote. The populations of these states have been fed lies vis-à-vis the media; propagandizing these “rogue nations” and promoting an ‘Us vs. Them’ mentality, to garner support for these armed conflicts. War is our primordial instinct, as humans are territorial and aggressive. That is our nature, and by looking at events in our history, one may see that war appears to be timeless and inevitable.

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.

The theory explains the war in a scientific way, the theory entails that all wars fit a pattern, and by tracing out the pattern brought about by the war it should offer a plausible account of both why and how the war came about. Most of the time theories and explanations of the causes of war are done through the lens of historians; however, this paper uses the perspective of political scientists. The new lens allows for new information about the dynamics of the war. Figure I shows what the theory entails is necessary causes for war and the expansion of the war. Vasquez does state that the presences of one cause are not sufficient to bring about a war. A world war is defined

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

As you look back into history you see that war is created for several different reasons. In this paper I will be reviewing the relationship between war, territory, and arms races on a dyadic level of analysis. Scholars have come to various conclusions on different aspects of these two theories and I will discuss and evaluate a few different perspectives or angles of each theory to see how they help contribute to the creation of war between two interstates.

Vietnam and Afghanistan are “most-likely” cases because no other states in the post-World War II period have had such lengthy periods of war that combined, just as in Europe, external and internal conflict. Obviously there are important fundamental differences, including history and geography, between the two cases. Another key difference is that Afghanistan is still at war and Vietnam is not, but this difference is not critical: in the cases will show how war helped strengthen the Vietnamese state while weakening the Afghan one, so we are able to examine the posited theoretical mechanisms and show their operation. Further, these are the best two cases for our purposes because the length and lethality of these wars permit more detailed tracing

War is inherent in the development of capitalism- as well as a decisive phenomenon in the transformation of the history of humanity in its different stages: from the accumulation originating, going through the industrial revolution and the imperialist period, until now, in the era of globalization, and their interactions are multiple and varied.