And you choose to believe this study rather than the ones with opposite conclusions that it is a response to because..?It certainly can help. Generally it won't remove a despot, but it does force them to be more democratic and chill the fuck down.
The Underestimated Effect of Democratic Sanctions
von Soest, Christian, and Michael Wahman. 2014. “The Underestimated Effect of Democratic Sanctions.” E-International Relations.wcfia.harvard.edu
Ukraine
- Thread starter Silvanus
- Start date
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,150
- 4,011
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,150
- 4,011
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Well, there are 3 options for a situation like this. Do nothing, sanctions or military response. If sanctions do nothing as it seems you are implying then we either do nothing or send troops, sending troops isn't a great option since Russia has nukes and Putin seems like a nukie kinda guy. So it seems like you just want nothing done.
Unless you think an imperial power should be allowed to dismantle a government because that government might, as some future point, make a decision it doesn't like while getting thousands killed in the process, it's either sanctions or war, take your pick.
hmm, kill the entire world, kill innocent people, or don't kill innocent people. this is a tough choice for you?
I'm sorry, which option is "don't kill innocent people"? 'Cause I dunno if you've noticed, but there's plenty of innocent people dying right now.
So, just to be clear: you are arguing in favor of plan "let imperial powers do what they want with no interference"
So, just to be clear: you are arguing in favor of the plan "treat a population like idiots who can't figure out that you, not their government, are the ones responsible for their starvation". And this in a place where you've already severely meddled in their government resulting in the current regime.
If there are no sanction, then *check notes* Russia still kill thousands of people per week
And if there are... that still happens! But you've also killed more people, so that's... good according to liberals, apparently?
Would the guy not do the interview without a picture of a Nazi in the shot? Was there nowhere else to put the camera? Did every other wall in the house have something even worse? What is going on with PBS?
Last edited:
Do you understand the concept of two wrongs dont make a right?
Pinker never said that wars have stopped, just that relatively speaking, we're in an exceptionally peaceful point in human history, and he's far from the only person to do so.The Russian invasion of Ukraine is going to lead to more wars as my professor on IR Bear Braumoeller put it, wars have not stopped despite some people thinking they have.
Like this guy.
Steven Pinker: This Is History's Most Peaceful Time--New Study: "Not So Fast"
War deaths have increased dramatically in the modern era, new research contends, despite other statistics that suggest the risks of becoming a victim of violence have lessenedwww.scientificamerican.com
In the end, we are all just soldiers whether it's for fighting for ourselves as workers to get a wage, fighting to put food on the table for our family, or fighting to ensure a better world tomorrow which will end as soon as the next war begins or fighting so we don't get sent to jail, a gulag, or a camp.
Statistically speaking, he's right, and even then, relative deaths from war have declined. For instance, WWII killed around 70-85 million people, so in total no. it takes the top spot, but in relative terms...well, fun fact, if the Mongol Empire was formed today, you'd be looking at a body count of 800 million if we assume the 'death ratio' remains consistent. Relative numbers give us a better look at progress than absolute numbers.
Whether the "Long Peace" remains long, of course, is another matter. And even then, you (and people have) made the argument that you can draw comparisons to past periods in history where things seemed peaceful, and then war reared its ugly head again.
But three lefts do, so...
Look, I think PInker overblows his points and needs to get his head out of his ass. But I can still think that he generally correct, that there is a general trend towards less wars
My main gripe with Pinker is that he puts too much focus on the Enlightenment as the be-all and end-all of all human progress. Still, fundamentally, he's right. Look at any measure of human wellbeing, and we're in the best period in human history. There's every chance that could come crashing down due to war, or climate change, or anything else, but at this point in time, well...
I forget who said it, but there's quote I think applies.
"We world is terrible. The world has never been better. These aren't mutually exclusive statements."