Skip to main content

The Purpose of War

Wars are how a nation chooses how people die during peace time.

The following shows how many people die from various causes, globally and annually:
So wars are what all nations use to decide how the winning nation chooses how people live and die during peace time. How so? Well, the winner chooses how it kills it's own people does it not AND how the loser chooses it to a large extent too. If the winner did not win, how would they be able to choose anything at all?

It's a toughie isn't it. It repels the mind does it not. That Me as a good citizen is to all intents supporting this system wide psychopathy. I thought I was a good person...until now 

The reason War gets so much publicity is because people are tribal and obedient to the tribe above all else. That is all. So we care far more about tribal obedience than we do about more important things like how many of our own people we allow the governments we elect to kill. This much should be obvious to anyone who looks at what is happening in front of their face.

So, in the meantime, while we all argue about which tribes story should dominate, millions die in far far far larger numbers than war. This is the outcome of the tribal obedience which all people live by.

We care more about our tribal narrative and ensuring everyone obeys it, than we do about the major causes of death.

Some people say the 'purpose of war' theory is a flawed obedience theory because air crashes stir up a lot of news too like wars  yet are not a tribal factor. But are air crashes and rail crashes not already in the same subset of death toll as road traffic accidents? Accidents are a risk analysis we subconsciously make because of a things convenience. Travel by air being extremely convenient compared to road travel, quite possibly even a thousand times more convenient.

And does this not reinforce the theory even more intensely - war, also being a risk analysis, is saying we're OK with war because the risk fits in with our subconscious tribal model?

The purpose of war is to boost the tribes power compared to the other tribe. So this lifts its necessity far higher than other more abstract factors like air crashes which are just another form of risk analysis.

The central argument is that war serves as a mechanism for the victorious tribe/nation to impose its preferred methods of governance, regulation, taxation, and thus control over mortality (both direct and indirect) in the postwar "peace." 

Winners don't just conquer territory—they dictate the systems that determine how people live and die afterward, including for the losers. Without victory, a nation lacks the power to enforce its particular "killing" mechanisms (e.g., policies leading to excess deaths).

This flips conventional views: war isn't primarily about resources, ideology, or glory in isolation. It's a high-stakes contest to decide whose version of peacetime systemic harm prevails.

People are far more invested in their group's narrative and victory than in addressing larger, ongoing causes of death enabled by the governments they support.

I've addressed potential counterarguments (e.g., that air crashes also get massive coverage without being "tribal") by suggesting that accidents (road, air, rail) are accepted as subconscious risk analyses tied to convenience—air travel is vastly more convenient, so the risk is tolerated.

War fits a similar subconscious calculation, but is elevated because it directly boosts the tribe's power relative to rivals. 
This makes war "worth" the risk in the tribal model, reinforcing obedience theory.
Victory allows the winning tribe to normalise its own systems of control and mortality in peacetime. Curiously this intersects well with Orwell's prescient tome.


Labels:

Popular Posts

A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States (UKEXIT)

A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States Executive Summary This initiative seeks to foster a formal dialogue regarding the potential accession of the countries of the United Kingdom , to the United States , as individual states.  Being English the main focus is for the country of England to accede. The original intent was to ask the government to lead on it through a petition leading to the question coming before the House of Commons. This was crushed out of hand by the committee leading petitions, which was not a surprise.  Simply put, this petition is asking the government to start a conversation about the benefits of leaving the UK and joining the United States. Let us call the initiative UKEXIT (yukezit) The objective is to evaluate the benefits to citizens and stakeholders, encouraging a constructive discourse on the political, economic, and social implications of such a union. If Wales , Northern Ireland , Scotland , or  England were to leave the Unit...
Read more

The 450 Volt Truth: From Orwell to Obedience

A Complete Thread on Dystopia, Milgram, and Breaking the Agentic State - Why People Act Irrationally and Often Violently When a Tribal Social Structure and Its Hierarchy Are Brought Under Serious Scrutiny This is a tricky topic. Please read the Obedience Glossary of Terms before proceeding Executive Summary This piece was written from a long conversation with Grok. I had to interrogate the AI quite a bit. And was astonished at how it produced such intelligence. I've included the most pertinent parts. Do not be fooled into thinking this is just another Orwell analysis. That is just setting the scene well. For what comes later on the agentic state and how power uses it to control the masses.  It may not have all the answers. It might wrong. A lot of it is very hard to believe is happening. But it still seems to fit the bizarre world of system wide dissonance we all live and partake in today, better than all the alternatives. So deserves your continued attention. By all means make yo...
Read more

Government & Tax Death Toll

I'm going to show you how government and taxation causes more excess death than any other factor, even global wars and pandemics. It is and always has been the biggest genocide of all. And its deliberate. Government doesn’t just fail to save lives — it takes them, at scale.  2–6 million globally 200K–400K in the U.S. 50K–80K in the UK Every year. Every tax. Every regulation. Cumulatively since 1970 government and tax killed between 160 and 300 million people across the globe  More than all 20th century wars and genocides combined (260M) In the U.S. ten times more than all U.S. combat deaths in history (10 * 1.2M) In the UK equivalent to 1 in 15 of all deaths And the nations with more regulations and a higher tax to GDP ratio such as the UK and US, tend to kill more of their own citizens per capita. The poorest nations have a better record than the richest. All this excess death is rooted in the institutions of taxation - the theft of private property, by force, against your fr...
Read more