God and war
Those who hate God must hate war as well, because war demands the imposition of religious values.
The concentration of power drives mankind to manage societies according to totalitarian concepts, but it is not by mere circumstance that one design is favoured over the other.
The world is full of people who despise the higher demands of public order. Instead of welcoming the next higher level as a venue of resolution, as a way to further develop that which has met its limits on the lower levels, they see those demands simply as weapons in the fight on their level.
These do not only not believe in God, they are annoyed by the very idea of Him. Plato wrote in The Laws that the legal and unjust gain is at least twice as big as the gain that is only legal and that the expenses, which serve neither good nor bad ends, are only half of those, which would serve good ends. That may explain the annoyance, but more importantly it warns us against the hearts of those who have acquired great power.
Not wanting to be definite in any given case, it remains a certainty that the hatred of God will grow strong in a secular society, for the reins that would hinder it are banned, and you don't have to be older than six years of age to have seen this first hand.
Will all this will stand idly by? Or will it employ its means in order to change the world according to its desires?
The latter would entail a war on God and hence a war on war, for without the latter the former could not be won. How then to fight a war on war?
There are only two ways:
Which leaves the second option. How do you destroy the ability of the military to wage war? By undermining its power, that is to say by stealthily counterbalancing it.
The system of nuclear deterrence has left the job half finished, so the effort persists, conventional capabilities are being equalised in many contexts, for instance via no-fly zones. But what is the goal for the top level?
Saner minds would conclude that there is nothing more that can be done, but the trend is clear:
But sabotage to achieve what? Certainly not to bring the economy down, because that's where those who drive this reside. What other aims are there? I can only think of one other aim, namely to sabotage political decisions, not over an extended period of time, only during a critical interval.
So? I ventured some time ago that China might attack Taiwan while the United States would watch from afar paralysed. That scenario has not become less likely, but it is of course China's choice and if I was China, I wouldn't do it. If China did it though, I think after what I've considered in this post that it might indeed suit the party that wages the war on war, for it did arguably prepare for this eventuality and it is conceivable that it considers the militaries better balanced, when top control of a region is exerted by the regional top power, hoping perhaps to then further break things down.
Then again, my genius does not lie in planning manoeuvres of this kind. Something is afoot. Something will be sabotaged. And somehow this is supposed to make the world more to the liking of those who hate God and hence war.
The concentration of power drives mankind to manage societies according to totalitarian concepts, but it is not by mere circumstance that one design is favoured over the other.
The world is full of people who despise the higher demands of public order. Instead of welcoming the next higher level as a venue of resolution, as a way to further develop that which has met its limits on the lower levels, they see those demands simply as weapons in the fight on their level.
These do not only not believe in God, they are annoyed by the very idea of Him. Plato wrote in The Laws that the legal and unjust gain is at least twice as big as the gain that is only legal and that the expenses, which serve neither good nor bad ends, are only half of those, which would serve good ends. That may explain the annoyance, but more importantly it warns us against the hearts of those who have acquired great power.
Not wanting to be definite in any given case, it remains a certainty that the hatred of God will grow strong in a secular society, for the reins that would hinder it are banned, and you don't have to be older than six years of age to have seen this first hand.
Will all this will stand idly by? Or will it employ its means in order to change the world according to its desires?
The latter would entail a war on God and hence a war on war, for without the latter the former could not be won. How then to fight a war on war?
There are only two ways:
- either you destroy the process that employs the military
- or you destroy the ability of the military to wage war.
Which leaves the second option. How do you destroy the ability of the military to wage war? By undermining its power, that is to say by stealthily counterbalancing it.
The system of nuclear deterrence has left the job half finished, so the effort persists, conventional capabilities are being equalised in many contexts, for instance via no-fly zones. But what is the goal for the top level?
Saner minds would conclude that there is nothing more that can be done, but the trend is clear:
- Bush used faith to reshape conventional wisdom,
- Obama used wisdom to reshape conventions,
- Bush managed to get the people behind him,
- Obama managed not to get stopped by the people
- and now only about 20% of Americans support new conventions.
But sabotage to achieve what? Certainly not to bring the economy down, because that's where those who drive this reside. What other aims are there? I can only think of one other aim, namely to sabotage political decisions, not over an extended period of time, only during a critical interval.
So? I ventured some time ago that China might attack Taiwan while the United States would watch from afar paralysed. That scenario has not become less likely, but it is of course China's choice and if I was China, I wouldn't do it. If China did it though, I think after what I've considered in this post that it might indeed suit the party that wages the war on war, for it did arguably prepare for this eventuality and it is conceivable that it considers the militaries better balanced, when top control of a region is exerted by the regional top power, hoping perhaps to then further break things down.
Then again, my genius does not lie in planning manoeuvres of this kind. Something is afoot. Something will be sabotaged. And somehow this is supposed to make the world more to the liking of those who hate God and hence war.
Labels: 26, geschichte, gesetze, institutionen, wahrnehmungen, zeitgeschichte, ἰδέα, φιλοσοφία
Eingetragen Am/um
19:44
