Digital Underground - uXu - Underground eXperts United #uxu-331

### ### ### ### ### #### ### ### ### #### ### ### ##### ### ### ### ### ### ### ### ### ### ##### ### ### ########## ### ### ########## ### ### ### ### Underground eXperts United Presents... ####### ## ## ####### # # ####### ####### #### ## ## ## ## ##### # ## # ## ## #### ## ## #### # # #### #### ## ## ## ## ## ##### # ## # ## ## ## ## ####### ####### # # ####### ####### ###### [ A Prayer For War ] [ By Hedge ] ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ A Prayer For War Hedge -96 (in your face beeeit'ch) I sometimes get a bit confused. I see and hear people everywhere talking about what's on the news. If you ever stop to listen more carefully to what they are discussing, you will eventually find out that it is mostly about some war that is going on somewhere. If you listen even more carefully, you will hear that they feel war to be the utmost evil an cruel occupation for a country. This is where my confusion sets in. Why do they feel this way? Is it just the normal politically correct statement, or have they thought it over? Why is war considered to be something totally bad and peace/democracy something totally beyond criticism? Are these just merely definitions that holds no values? I will argue that they are, and point out the things I think need to be considered before putting peace before war. There have been wars going on since the dawn of man. From the very beginning, there have been fights over territory, water, food or other needful things. Even the wise Greeks fought their wars and at the same time they proclaimed rationality to be the ideal. All these wars have had something in common. They have all survival as a foundation. This may seem somewhat contradictory, but let me elaborate. As I said in the very beginning of this paragraph, man has been fighting since the beginning. All these fights have concerned winning, or taking possession over, things that made survival easier. This can easily be understood by everyone. If you get the best food, wells and mating partners, chances are that your species, or tribe, will have greater success in surviving. As long as there is a chance of winning, and the reward will substantially enhance your chance of survival, people will fight. So are these modern wars just some all-out lust for blood, since there isn't really any need to think about survival in the world today? I don't think they are. I hear scientists talking all the time about how man still holds primal urges, like for instance, the will to mate or protect his family. The way I see it, we are fighting for the same reasons as the stone age humans, but the advantages sought are much less pronounced. Nowadays we like to wrap the reasons in packages, economic or perhaps racial, but survival is always in the background. 'If we get hold of their oil, then maybe we can make our own country flourish.' 'If we kick all these <choose cultural belonging> out, then we will be able to feed our own people.' I think that this basic instinct has to be taken more seriously than the thought of man being peaceful in general. Lure him with a tasty morsel, and heads will roll. Do these modern wars just bring misery and pain? Well, that's the whole purpose with fighting, to inflict more damage to the other part than he inflicts upon you. This inevitably leads to people dying and suffering. I, however, feel that it is to narrow-minded to think only about that side. When there is a war, evolution and technical progress take giant leaps. We get more inventions of importance during five years of war than during twenty non-war years. It is amazing what the fight for survival can make man achieve. And, since technical innovations can be used for other things than to fight wars with, for example better ways to use existing resources, we are actually increasing the potential of surviving when fighting a war. I can agree this seems a bit cold and calculating, but a need to crack eggs will always exist when making an omelet. There is another side of war which I feel has gotten much less attention than it deserves. I am talking about the creativity of the people. During peace, people relax. During long periods of non-fighting, they stop to think. There is no need to think, you will survive anyway. This leads to a population of lazy non-intellectual retards. The only thing that concern them is what's on the TV, and if the taxes are being raised (again?). The 'democratic' peace loving state will make things even worse. Here, the state will even take care of things for you, reducing the 'risk' of having to use your brain even more. During a war, however, people have to think for themselves. If they don't, they will not survive. This will take their minds off petty things like the ones discussed above, and down to what really matters. Out of this comes the feeling of enjoying life. You fight for survival of your nation, and you are still alive, so you enjoy living. People who enjoy life, and feel the sensation of being a part of a tribe or nation, are capable of creating masterpieces in literature and other cultural fields. Look at the cultural history if you don't believe me. No, I think it is time to start considering the advantages of war, not just the politically correct: 'Peace is good, war is bad' statements. Lets do what serves the public good best, so what if a few people die? For one thing, it will eventually stabilize the overpopulation! And I get to play with guns more... -Raise the flag, we're off to war who gives a damn what we are fighting for! -Lets maim and murder, claim and rape when we're coming, there's no escape. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- uXu #331 Underground eXperts United 1996 uXu #331 Call THE YOUNG GODS -> +351-1XX-XXXXX ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

← Svenska e-zines (1990-2008)