The United States likes to disguise its actions by saying that we are fighting to bring democracy to others, or we liberated the Iraqis from Saddam Hussein. War is not necessarily a bad thing; it is just the way life is. We can’t really change the facts of life. All nations strive to have power, influence, and wealth. Why wouldn’t you want to be apart of a prosperous country? It is much more comfortable to live in a country such as the United States as opposed to a war torn country such as Somalia. You can’t blame countries such as the United States for wanting power, but it’s also understandable that countries with less success would be angry. All of this is directly caused by our competitive evolutionary programming. One thing is for certain; war is not going to disappear anytime soon. Unless humans evolve to a higher level of understanding; we will always wage war. Of course war could also end if humans were to become extinct
War is almost guaranteed to be around as long as humans walk the face of this earth. The roots of war are deeply embedded in every civilization. Just like our ancestors, we will continue to fight among ourselves for many years to come. From an evolutionary point of view, war makes total sense. War is simply cause by a group of people banning together in order to survive. This is clearly a reflection of Darwin’s survival of the fittest. Alliances among groups of people fight to further benefit themselves as a whole. An alliance could take the form of a prehistoric tribe, or a modern day country. These alliances fight over a variety of things varying between land and resources. No war is waged without someone trying to benefit from it to some degree. As Sam Richards pointed out in class, even the United States is fighting over resources to this day. The United States is currently waging wars in the Middle East to gain access to oil rich areas. If the United States was not in power and waging this war, then another powerful country such as China, India, or Russia would most likely be over there fighting the exact same war. .
The United States is spreading itself too thin across countries it doesn’t need to be in. All empires throughout history have made this same mistake and have failed. In reality, it isn’t good to try to be an empire. We could be spending our military money elsewhere within our own country to improve our nation. I would have to agree with Thomas Jefferson’s foreign policy the most. Jefferson actively promoted non-interventionism. If we were to stay out of world events that don’t concern us, our country would be in a better state. Conflicts in countries such as Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya could be avoided. Our economy might also do better in the long run if we adopted a foreign policy leaning towards isolationism. We should never completely cut off the rest of the world. Obviously it is still necessary to intervene when widespread crimes against humanity are being committed, such as Nazi Germany in World War II. The United States should downsize its military. If any one branch needs to be expanded, it should only be the coast guard.
“The Cost of Empire” raises some serious questions about the American military size and budget. The United States spends a ridiculous amount on maintaining its military and influence around the word. It is essentially an empire, but as one person says in this video, all empires fall at one point or another. America has the toughest, largest, and most advanced military in the world. Even with half of the current military budget, the United States would still be at the top. It seems like a lot of money is being wasted on our armed forces. Why is it important that we remain so influential? The people in this video estimated that the United States has roughly 1,000 military bases in foreign countries. This does not seem necessary, since the majority of these countries are not at war with us anyway. The United States is also following a double standard by saying it promotes democracy, while still occupying foreign countries to maintain influence. Not only is this expensive, but it is rather pointless.
Initially the American people supported the war in Iraq because they were afraid. The American people had just been attacked on 9/11 and the threat of weapons of mass destruction caused Americans to support a “pro-war” policy. It wasn’t until after the American people found out there were no weapons of mass destruction that the war in Iraq began to lose its support. Another way to control a crowd is to convince them that following the group will be advantageous. Something as simple as an advertisement on TV would fit into this category. A store may try to attract crowds of people by offering large discounts. This store is trying to control potential customers by using advertisements that would entice crowds into their shops. The news also plays a huge part in crowd control. Scare tactics are commonly used on crowds through the media because the government has a large influence on what is being reported.
Motivating crowds to behave in a particular manner is no easy task. Large groups of people need to be convinced that a collective behavior will be beneficial to everyone including each person as an individual. A crowd is very difficult to get moving but once you jump start it, it tends to have a snowball effect. There are a few different ways to motivate a group of people and get them to behave in a certain way. One way is to convince them that they are in danger and that they need to act immediately. This technique is useful for relocating groups of people in order to prevent a high death toll in a natural disaster. This can be slightly difficult because it must be planned out in great detail prior to the actual event. You can’t just expect thousands of people to all simultaneously leave a city on the same highway. Crowd scare tactics are also useful for raising support for a war or rebellion. If you can convince a large group of people that another political party or country poses a threat to them, they are more prone to submitting to authority if a solution is offered. For example, Americans were told that Iraq processed weapons of mass destruction.
When humans feel threatened they need something more than just scientific knowledge about life. Science fails to give humans a sense of purpose, and this is where religion excels. For example, during the cold war people in the United States and other countries were constantly fearing the outbreak of a nuclear war. Ironically enough phrases such as, “in God we trust” were adopted as the official motto of the United States at this time. It began appearing on paper currency in 1957. If you were to study soldiers, you may find that many veterans that served in a war became religious around the time they were deployed. Events such as 9/11 may have also caused a spike in religion numbers. Right now the United States is relatively peaceful and people are living without fear or major hardships. If we were to feel that our very existence was on the verge of collapse, people would be far more likely to turn to their religions for a sense of security. It is highly unlikely that religion will die out; rather it would appear that its numbers may fluctuate based on world events around us. Religion may very well make a comeback, but only time will tell.
I find it interesting that statistically religion is on a decline; however I am not very surprised. We have entered an age where mass education in universities and public schools is beginning to cause people to question the beliefs of past generations. More and more people are regarding religion as superstitious, outdated, and old fashioned. Science has gradually shifted to our primary focus, and we seek to answer questions through reason rather than faith. Despite the decline in religious people, I doubt it will ever disappear entirely. I would have to agree more with Barry Kosmin when he says, “religious fervor waxes and wanes in unpredictable ways.” There are just too many factors that go into predicting a religious pattern and this data becomes almost useless. Human patterns are very complex, and generalizations can’t just be thrown around so easily. External factors can scare humans into becoming religious.
His mannerisms appear mechanical, and he has a hard time relaxing when he knows others are watching him. I find it funny that this man is talking about a holster for carrying concealed. His topic of discussion seems to reaffirm the serotype that white, middleclass men are slightly paranoid and fearful of the world around them. This man feels fear to the point where he has decided to carry a handgun. There’s nothing wrong with carrying concealed, but leave it to white people to market holsters that are placed on awkward parts of the body. Maybe this man has robotic movements while lacking expression because he is fearful. Fear can make any kind of person uptight. It’s possible that white people are more uptight because the minority groups around them are growing, while the “white” race is not growing at the same rate. It might be a bit far to say that this man is carrying a firearm and acting white because of minority groups, but it isn’t completely unbelievable. The more obvious question to why this man might appear so tense is because he has a firearm right between his legs… any person might begin to act “white” if they used one of those holsters.
This guy really does seem to be your typical middle class “white guy” from the United States. Just like any other race, white people have a stereotype and this middle aged man fits it perfectly. For starters this man is of European descent, and he has average facial features, hair color, and stature. This man even dresses like an average white person. He wants to dress somewhat professionally, but he refrains from dressing up in a suit and tie. His polo shirt and belted jeans show that he’s a middle class guy trying to come across as clean cut while staying comfortable and casual at the same time. Like a lot of white people, this guy comes across as rigid and slightly tense. He makes subtle hand gestures while talking, but he is not overly expressive. His movements lack smoothness, and they are slightly awkward. It seems like everything he does lacks expression. While speaking this man keeps a straight face, and he can’t even manage to smile when he makes a lame joke.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Brainchild