World peace?

[Pete]

World peace? These are the only 11 countries in the world that are actually free from conflict

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-9669623.html

And the US ain't one of them. They do go through how they picked them.


"With the crisis in Gaza, the rise of Islamist militants in Iraq and Syria and the international stand-off ongoing in Ukraine, it can sometimes feel like the whole world is at war.

But experts believe this is actually almost universally the case, according to a think-tank which produces one of the world’s leading measures of “global peacefulness” – and things are only going to get worse...."

[Old Dog New Trick]

Hmm, seems that countries with a high percentage of individual ownership of firearms are more peaceful than countries where only the government has all the firepower...

In Brazil and Costa Rica, for instance, the level of internal conflict may be the lowest possible – but civilian access to small arms and the likelihood of violent demonstrations are worryingly high.

Switzerland is famously detached when it comes to any external conflict, and has a very low risk of internal problems of any kind – but loses a number of points on the overall index because of its proportionately huge rate of arms exports per 100,000 of the population.

[tonyz]

"The GPI is developed by IEP under the guidance of an international panel of independent experts with data collated and calculated by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU).

It is composed of 22 indicators, ranging from a nation’s level of military expenditure to its relations with neighbouring countries and the percentage of prison population."

http://economicsandpeace.org/researc...al-peace-index

[Flagg]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

I don't see how arms exports per 100,000 of the population has anything to do with how "peaceful" a country is. I am not sure I agree that how "peaceful" a country is has anything to do with whether it is involved with conflict or not. Countries that abstain from conflict can actually be the ones that incite global violence. Countries that get involved with conflict can be the ones that preserve the peace, and thus are more devoted to peace than others.

I assume arms exports as an indicator of "national peacefulness" is based on voluntary/admitted/known weapons exports.

I wonder how they account for countries exporting weapons to proxy forces where there is no public reporting?

[mark46th]

World Peace or whirled peas. What difference does it make now?

[Flagg]

Originally Posted by mark46th

World Peace or whirled peas. What difference does it make now?

Is "world peace" an artificial progressive liberal construct like a communist utopia?

Does human behavior at the micro level prevent "world peace" at the macro human behavior level?

For me, I am increasingly concerned with attitudes I perceive coming from progressive liberals.

I sense a whole lot of 1st world folks confusing technological revolution with human sloth-like evolutionary behavior.

Just because technological change is accelerating towards Star Trek does not mean human behavior is more than a few seconds removed from cavemen.

Personally, I think that particular form of idealistic naïveté is incredibly dangerous.

[tonyz]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

I wonder how they view level of military expenditure. Because for a country like the United States, I'd say a high level of military expenditure indicates an increase towards being peaceful, whereas a low level of military expenditure may indicate the desire for peace on the part of certain stupid politicians, but the actual result being a trend towards less peace globally.

Stop wondering and ask them.

Let us know what you find.

[blacksmoke]

Originally Posted by Flagg

Is "world peace" an artificial progressive liberal construct like a communist utopia?

Does human behavior at the micro level prevent "world peace" at the macro human behavior level?

For me, I am increasingly concerned with attitudes I perceive coming from progressive liberals.

I sense a whole lot of 1st world folks confusing technological revolution with human sloth-like evolutionary behavior.

Just because technological change is accelerating towards Star Trek does not mean human behavior is more than a few seconds removed from cavemen.

Personally, I think that particular form of idealistic naïveté is incredibly dangerous.

Excellent post.

[Flagg]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

What makes you think we are removed from cave men at all? IMHO we are the same on principal. While we have replaced rocks and sticks with AK's and RPG's the basic principal is the same. Look at how often genocide occurs today in all parts of the world. How about crime in these countries at peace? Do no rapes or murders occur there? While technology has evolved we have not at all IMHO.

I'll give humanity in the 1st world west and some developing world countries a tiny bit of progress in the form of instruments like the US Constitution, Magna Carta, Elglish Common Law to codify natural justice and a set of both freedoms and limitations to acceptable human behavior.

But when "some are more equal than others" accelerated the fall of communism(due to communism' failure to account for human behavior) and is currently polluting the US Republic, those bits of paper being treated like toilet paper instead of separating us from our cave dwelling ancestors leads me to think the gulf between today and the Neanderthals is shrinking.

I look at the Swiss as having the least flawed system due to the Swiss drilling down to the ultra local level.

You want citizenship? You're neighbours who've lived next to you for the last 10 years have a say.

It's like a combination of the best parts of a modern democratic country with the best parts of a local community.

I reckon the Swiss are at least a couple hours out of the caves.

Earlier this year I hopefully saw the last first hand mark one eyeball example of cave dwellers in Afghanistan(Bamyan).

One of the more awkward meetings I had in that "country" was with a fairly senior minister who spent about 15 minutes laughing and making jokes about cave dwelling "Afghans".

iPads don't put distance between ourselves and caves, but documents like the Constitution recognise we are cavemen at heart, and provide us with a fair set of freedoms and rules to leave the cave and land on the Moon.

I'm proud to be a caveman who has agreed to abide by a set of rules and is comfortable with how to leverage technology and rudimentary tools to hunt and make fire.

If the rules ever theoretically became too lopsided against the average caveman then modern technology and tools become force multipliers for modern cavemen to hunt and make fire.

I just don't see how the technological revolution in the last 40-50 years has in any way made us less likely to commit acts of mass violence on one another.

More likely. Yes.

Less likely. No.