"If one starts off with the premise that human beings are prone to such innate war making tendencies—and this premise has been challenged" -- by whom? Please provide sources to the evolutionary biologists, sociologists, anthropologists, archaeologists, and historians assembled to make this argument, since the consesus within all of those schools supports the opposite conclusion at present.
It is one thing to complain, rightly, that "war talk" is cliched and overused because the English language still has that lasting impact of two world wars and a Cold War. It is quite another thing to complain, wrongly, that all wars are just anomalies, caused by someone, somewhere, being a bad person with bad ideas. I can prove this to you by holding a peace conference. Within ten minutes, acrimonous policy disputes and personality cults will emerge, preventing utlimate unity of agreement, except perhaps through the most anodyne and meaningless of final communiques.
And dollars to donuts, they will use war metaphors.
"If one starts off with the premise that human beings are prone to such innate war making tendencies—and this premise has been challenged" -- by whom? Please provide sources to the evolutionary biologists, sociologists, anthropologists, archaeologists, and historians assembled to make this argument, since the consesus within all of those schools supports the opposite conclusion at present.
It is one thing to complain, rightly, that "war talk" is cliched and overused because the English language still has that lasting impact of two world wars and a Cold War. It is quite another thing to complain, wrongly, that all wars are just anomalies, caused by someone, somewhere, being a bad person with bad ideas. I can prove this to you by holding a peace conference. Within ten minutes, acrimonous policy disputes and personality cults will emerge, preventing utlimate unity of agreement, except perhaps through the most anodyne and meaningless of final communiques.
And dollars to donuts, they will use war metaphors.