The article is actually somehow worse than the headline. It looks at things on a scale of thousands of years, and the argument is essentially "war happened, the conditions of humanity improved, ergo war is good". Then it's just filler, mostly name dropping events and famous works, literally distracting you from the fact that it's a dog shit argument by going "oh you think my argument is dumb? Well I'm smart so how could that be?"

  • Netdisk [none/use name]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Well sure, he's thinking of it from his perspective. Elites don't go off and fight wars (any more), they send working class to do it for them. Sure, it benefits his class. It always has.

    Well, except in the old, old days when elites led armies and would get captured in battle and beheaded by the other side's elites. Boy, I miss those days.

    EDIT: wait a minute, this is from 2014, during the Obama drone murder spree. I bet it's defending him in the face of criticism that he said he wouldn't kill more children than all other Nobel Peace Prize winners put together.