Jump to content

Iraqi civil war.

Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Except that many children have already been conscripted into third-world militias, and have been killing for years. It would have to target them as well in order to even come close to hindering the violence inherent in human nature.

Actually it's pretty much impossible to get humans to stop killing each other unless you "modified" the human. ISIS is just the crowning example of the violence inherent in human nature. It's almost sickening.

Share this post


Link to post

I still think it'd be easier to stop the killing if I only had to work with kids. You know, because kids just haven't had as much time to grow truly evil as adults have.

Share this post


Link to post
I still think it'd be easier to stop the killing if I only had to work with kids. You know, because kids just haven't had as much time to grow truly evil as adults have.

 

Here's a paradox for you: stop the killing by killing everyone. That should solve the world's problems mighty quick. :D

Share this post


Link to post

I seriously doubt you would be able to reduce the percentage of population that commits violent acts by killing off adults. If anything, you'd increase the violent crime rate since there would be little if any moral leadership left.

Share this post


Link to post

Except for the fact that the world has repeatedly proven that its "moral leadership" is total hogwash. People are more moral without them than with them, because their "morals" are usually totally backwards and evil things like "kill heretics" and "kill gays" and "kill witches" and so on forever. The Sunnis say to kill Shia, the Shia say to kill Sunnis, both say to kill Jews, and that's their idea of "moral guidance". The rest of the world may not be that far gone, but it's still rather decidedly off its rocker forcing on children things like learned helplessness and drug dependency. Without the people spreading that crap, humanity could return to being true neutral (actually more likely chaotic neutral, since, you know, children) instead of lawful evil.

Share this post


Link to post

And we're back here again. Where I make an argument, in this case for the same view of human nature as expressed by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and you think all you need to counter it is a "NUH-UHHHHH!"

 

My entire argument was that humans are inherently innocent. By nature, they act in the best interests of themselves and their loved ones to the best of their knowledge and ability, and everything they do normally is an extension of that, such as trying to strengthen their community. Anything they do that they do not believe serves such a purpose is a conditioned behaviour, and usually links right back up with that anyway as some manner of deception or delusion leads them to believe that their actions are good for themselves, their loved ones or their communities in some way. People have been exploiting this part of human nature to further their own interests for millenia, and sometimes it gets beyond their control. By removing the influence of those who are exploiting their desires to further their own, people will return to their default of looking out for themselves and their loved ones, and their communities as an extension of that. THAT is human nature.

 

Come up with a counter-argument or get lost.

Share this post


Link to post

Go back and re-watch that old Star Trek episode with the planet of only kids.

Or, you know, "Lord of the Flies."

 

Humans are inherently selfish, demanding, ignorant, impulsive, and blame-avoiding.

They're BORN that way: I've pretty much described a baby exactly.

 

People do what they do for the same reason we all do:

Because it seemed like a good idea at the time.

SOMETIMES that coincides with their best interests, but frequently not.

 

You can't have both innocence and education, ya see. If you don't educate them, they'll die off pretty quickly. If you do, then they'll start figuring things out on their own, and pretty soon you'll be right back where you started.

Share this post


Link to post

Your evidence is Star Trek and Lord of the Flies? SERIOUSLY? You're using FICTION to back up an argument on human psychology? Because I'll tell you straight-out that if humans were as you described WE WOULD ALL BE FUCKING DEAD. Nature is pretty unforgiving, and if we really were the stupid, impulsive louts you describe we would NEVER have survived. We survived in a harsh environment for HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF FUCKING YEARS with NO technology, NO medicine and NO education, because we are SMART, CAPABLE and generally able to look out for our own well-being. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WE EXIST.

Share this post


Link to post
we are SMART, CAPABLE and generally able to look out for our own well-being. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WE EXIST.

 

I agree with this.

 

By removing the influence of those who are exploiting their desires to further their own, people will return to their default of looking out for themselves and their loved ones, and their communities as an extension of that.

 

But this is not what's going to happen if you remove all adults and only leave babies and hormonal teenagers. The problem is that without the experience carried by the adults, the teens will be repeating all the mistakes the human race have been learning from for the past 100 thousand years or so (this is not to bait BTG, by the way :-) ).

 

Your society will break down into permanent gang warfare where the strength of the moral principles governing each individual gang's behaviour will be inversely proportionate to the degree of its leader's psychopathy.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

HOW is that different from now?

 

And who said the teenagers would survive? Any method of elimination practically delivered, especially a disease as I mentioned, would not be able to tell a teenager from an adult. We'd be looking at pre and early pubescent kids *only*. While this isn't the ideal, any method of achieving this would likely only descriminate based on the immune changes during puberty, and that means we're looking at the eldest survivors being in their early teens at the most.

 

And it's not like such a method would be 100% effective, either, and if I did it *I* wouldn't be letting myself die. A considerable percentage of the targeted adults would survive the disease, ideally about 1% but probably more, and since it's statistically unlikely a significant number of them would remain from any form of government, I could move quickly during the spread of the disease and connect (through the internet) to spearhead the peacekeeping and social services that would be left. I'd be in a pretty good position for a takeover, and if that fails I'd just do it again until it works. Once I'm in control, I could direct humanity, or at least as much of it as possible, in a positive direction and spread that as much as possible. At the very least, the old world religions would be completely gone and there wouldn't be a food shortage anymore, the current governments (almost all of which are EVIL) would collapse and we'd get a blank(er) slate for me to work with. I could communicate a secular, egalitarian philosophy to as much of the world as possible and rely on the people that receive it to spread it to all the (importantly not strongly indoctrinated by their parents evil worldview and not very set in their ways) children available, and even though I'd hardly reach them all I'd reach a lot and that'd be a HUGE step up for humanity anyway. And if it's not enough, try again. I could do it several times before I'd have to stop, and I'm confident that even though this is unlikely to be 100% effective (or anything near it) it'd make a big step in the right direction.

 

Yes, I realise this is overly elaborate for a daydream that even if I had the power I doubt I'd ever actually do. Yes, I also realise what kind of psychopath that makes me look like. Trust me, this whole thing is just an expression of extreme frustration.

Share this post


Link to post

The internet will go down fairly quickly. You will probably be better off using short-wave radio (if you can get to a transmitter and get it working) and emergency PA in your area.

 

But the main problems are why do you think those surviving will listen to you, how can you make them follow your orders and what will happen if a big guy with a big gun will approach you and ask you to please GTFO?

 

I remember watching the situation in New Orleans after Katrina and one thing that struck me was how quickly the civilization dies when you cut off the power and comms.

 

Within a week they went all the way back to neolithic in terms of social structure and from then on that would have been the tribes and gangs fighting with each other until one of them became the top rooster. Thankfully, the rest of the country was still there and the army became that top rooster. But that won't be an option in your scenario.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

I find "I still have the disease, I'll do it again." is an effective way to keep people listening to you and to keep them from attacking you.

 

What? Morality doesn't really apply to this situation.

Share this post


Link to post

After a certain point people are not impressed with threats and are willing to risk themselves to kill someone.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, but risking that many other people is unlikely. If people thought like that, the cold war would have gone hot and most of us would be dead.

Share this post


Link to post

That's where the leaders come in. Certain individuals who have learned to keep cool over time. (usually people in their 40's and 50's, but there are extremely few in their 20's and 30's, and almost none younger)

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, bullshit. There are plenty of people with a level head WAY younger than that, and most people NEVER develop the slightest shred of patience or self control at ANY age.

Share this post


Link to post
Oh, bullshit. There are plenty of people with a level head WAY younger than that, and most people NEVER develop the slightest shred of patience or self control at ANY age.

 

Would the latter group include ISIS? The group we're supposed to be fucking talking about?

Share this post


Link to post

That's what I'm saying... It's the few that do (and the average is as I put it, extremely few and far between at younger ages, more common in the older crowd) that are keeping the world from massive wars over piddly shit.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in the community.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.