05-08-2020, 05:02 PM
** 08-May-2020 World View: Celebrating VE Day
May 8, 1945, was VE Day, or Victory in Europe day.
During today's coverage by the BBC World Service, there were comments
by historian Keith Lowe that I found very interesting.
He pointed out that the war in Europe did not end when the Germans
surrendered in May, 1945, but continued for years in the form of
smaller wars -- civil wars, ethnic cleansing, wars of national
liberation.
For example, in Greece, there was a civil war, with the people
fighting against one another, specifically a war between those who had
been collaborating with the Germans, and those who had been resisting,
who were mostly communists. And within the resistance there was
another civil war, between communists and non-communists. Fighting
continued until 1949. More people died after the war than during the
war.
That's just one example. There were ethnic civil wars in Ukraine,
Poland and other parts of Europe, according to Lowe.
This is interesting to me because it provides information about a
conundrum that I've been dealing with for years.
According to the Generational Dynamics model that I've developed, war
rarely has any purpose and rarely accomplishes anything, since
everything usually springs back to the way it was before the war by
the end of the subsequent Awakening era.
But there is one very important thing that war accomplishes: It kills
off enough people so that there will be enough food for everyone else.
In fact, this is why genocidal wars are necessary. The food supply
grows exponentially with new technology, but the population grows
exponentially faster than the food supply. So within a few decades, a
society will run out of food, and people have to start a genocidal war
to have enough to eat.
But for years, every time I mentioned this, someone would point out
that not that many people were killed in World War II, and I never had
a good answer for that. But Lowe's comment shows that there can be a
lot more people killed after the war than during the war. This would
resolve the conundrum.
Previously, I've also discussed a related concept called "democide,"
which describes how the winning side in a tribal or ethnic civil war
takes control of the government, and continues to kill people in the
losing tribe in the decades following the end of the war.
So it's still true that war doesn't accomplish anything, since
everything springs back to the way it was by the end of the following
Awakening era.
But it's also true that the genocidal crisis war -- and its aftermath
-- are very useful in killing off enough people, so that everyone else
has enough to eat. Think of genocidal war as an act of kindness.
May 8, 1945, was VE Day, or Victory in Europe day.
During today's coverage by the BBC World Service, there were comments
by historian Keith Lowe that I found very interesting.
He pointed out that the war in Europe did not end when the Germans
surrendered in May, 1945, but continued for years in the form of
smaller wars -- civil wars, ethnic cleansing, wars of national
liberation.
For example, in Greece, there was a civil war, with the people
fighting against one another, specifically a war between those who had
been collaborating with the Germans, and those who had been resisting,
who were mostly communists. And within the resistance there was
another civil war, between communists and non-communists. Fighting
continued until 1949. More people died after the war than during the
war.
That's just one example. There were ethnic civil wars in Ukraine,
Poland and other parts of Europe, according to Lowe.
This is interesting to me because it provides information about a
conundrum that I've been dealing with for years.
According to the Generational Dynamics model that I've developed, war
rarely has any purpose and rarely accomplishes anything, since
everything usually springs back to the way it was before the war by
the end of the subsequent Awakening era.
But there is one very important thing that war accomplishes: It kills
off enough people so that there will be enough food for everyone else.
In fact, this is why genocidal wars are necessary. The food supply
grows exponentially with new technology, but the population grows
exponentially faster than the food supply. So within a few decades, a
society will run out of food, and people have to start a genocidal war
to have enough to eat.
But for years, every time I mentioned this, someone would point out
that not that many people were killed in World War II, and I never had
a good answer for that. But Lowe's comment shows that there can be a
lot more people killed after the war than during the war. This would
resolve the conundrum.
Previously, I've also discussed a related concept called "democide,"
which describes how the winning side in a tribal or ethnic civil war
takes control of the government, and continues to kill people in the
losing tribe in the decades following the end of the war.
So it's still true that war doesn't accomplish anything, since
everything springs back to the way it was by the end of the following
Awakening era.
But it's also true that the genocidal crisis war -- and its aftermath
-- are very useful in killing off enough people, so that everyone else
has enough to eat. Think of genocidal war as an act of kindness.
