On Sat, 7 Feb 1998 Technotranscendence <neptune@mars.superlink.net> Wrote:
>It is not pure efficiency here that one should look for. For
>instance, a society which is more efficient at making war but less
>so at everything else can usually conquer others. E.g., the Mongol
>invasions of China or the Roman takeover of the Eastern Mediterranean.
Yes, ancient history can provide lots of such examples, but recent history
shows that a society that's good only at making war is doomed, consider
imperial Japan, Nazi Germany or the USSR. I think there are two reasons for
the change.
1) When technology is primitive it's difficult to create wealth, the best way
to get it is to steal it from somebody else who has fewer weapons than you
do. Technology is no longer so primitive, wealth is not conserved it can
be created, and there are easier ways to get power and money.
2) The power of offensive weapons has increased enormously while the
increase in defensive weapons has been much more modest. War is no longer
profitable.
>Greed is good!
I agree.
John K Clark johnkc@well.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBNNyFpX03wfSpid95AQFBRgTuIRWQL0P5U2wgYmSB4bPXCwfdfW4LXPWf
JW1XjMavd/tuQejn//9WZDD8oi50B58ZxhRSO46n0obTEt/1oypU+ZE95PdF2Z1d
RQxcSdM7I+AuzT4V9nda+lbWz1LPWc3+Oh6n+0edAYWCylzo8UlpoHXh2h9/MKEF
cP8wDjTlMrtAHpc9w3m3UEfTavUnRznix5Ag5ii9HpiJnbL3yIs=
=Vg6P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----