Will World War III be Unavoidable?

 

The easiest answer is, of course it is unavoidable, it is simply a matter of time. Well, perhaps we should rephrase the question to read, will World War III be unavoidable in the near future? Social scientists actually differ widely on this question from those claiming it might come by year’s end while others have claimed that the human species has grown beyond such levels of conflagration. Then there are many falling between these two extremes. We fall within the group who fear that there will be at least one more conflagration which will rank as being another World War. It is even possible that Professor Einstein got the answer wrong when he reputedly stated, “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” World War III may not result in a full-blown nuclear exchange and sufficient amounts of the world will survive with their institutions remaining intact. Eventually, if the human race continues to have philosophies, cultures, religious beliefs, political theories and alliances, then the possibility of a world conflagration destroying all of human societies will continue to exist. Perhaps, what we need to understand is why is it that the world has already experienced two World Wars on Earth and why the probability of at least one more such conflagrations is still in our future. The reason behind the last two World Wars and any number of similar conflagrations throughout human history regardless of locations boils down to one simple theory which has appeared to be nearly universally, the belief that their concepts which are the base defining principles underlying their societies are superior and require universal application. What these wars all had in common was the desire to spread their civilization across all of the world in order to bring their perfection to those less advanced or sophisticated as their civilization. World conquest has driven some of the most destructive wars and still there are those who claim to have the secrets to the world which they feel must be spread until they become the rulers of the planet. This is the disease which infects those who believe theirs is the only truth which all the people of the planet must adopt as their guiding principles in place of any and all others. In reality, it is unfortunate, but there are as many people, if not more, who have such driving ideas as there are different ideas upon which to base civilization. So, our question boils down to which belief system will be the driving force behind the coming World War III.

 

All forms of governance, be they rooted under religious philosophy or political philosophy, hold a belief that they should be the universal model. The difference comes down to whether their system requires all to be under a single hierarchal system or they can be independently ruled coexisting with one another peaceably sharing similar basic core beliefs. One can tie all of these entities together by simply considering them all under their philosophical underpinnings. Throughout history there has been one consistency shared by all those entities which began world conquest which led to what would be considered a world-wide war of their period, this was the concept that their system of beliefs were the most advanced and admirable and their leaders divinely chosen and thus intended to rule all of their world. These beliefs originally were almost always religious where their gods and godly systems were the pinnacle of human endeavors. Eventually these driving philosophies also became purely political without the necessity of gods to ratify their beliefs, these beliefs were simply inherently superior. Some have reached points where their claims are so humanly oriented that they claim that there are no gods thus this belief adds to their belief that their political system is superior to any other system which is so primitive as to believe in a deity of any sort. Others claim to have the approval of the only real set of deities, the final rules which present that your religious beliefs replace all previous teachings as it is the most advanced to valid because it came later after the deity or deities decided to provide a corrected version of prophecy. Some even have two separate set of prophesies which can even contradict each other such that those who interpret the religion could potentially decide to completely alter the faith and that which is presumed to be the more important beliefs. Such interpretations can even alter the interaction of such a group from adversarial to accommodating. The basis which will often determine whether a group will be likely to initiate the conditions which lead to a broader conflagration is their ability to accept those who disagree with their own operating philosophy. Those collections of people sharing a similar overriding ruling philosophy who feel threatened by another separate overriding ruling philosophy, then the possibility for conflict between the two greatly increase. That is an unfair way to understand the differences between overriding ruling philosophies. What one need do is to measure the potential for violence by any overriding ruling philosophy without any threat from the outside. The more stable any overriding ruling philosophy within their own borders showing no desire to force their system or rulers upon any other group replacing their overriding ruling philosophy, the less likely such a group is of initiating a war without provocations.

 

World War III

 

This understanding can be used to decide how safe our world is and what are the leading opportunities to start the dreaded World War III. There have been numerous reports which claim that China has been arming to attempt to spread their form of Communism to the whole of the world. Their military build-up has been designed to counter the military abilities of the United States assuming that if they were able to defeat the United States in a quick war, an overwhelming attack, then the rest of the world would simply surrender. There are some who claim that the Chinese are and have been working with the Russians both as the Soviet Union and now as Russia, in their mutual desire to spread Communism. This has been the fear for initiating World War III over most of the past since World War II. Now there are those who claim that Iran might also be working toward initiating World War III and the current threat for hostilities between Iran and the United States or Israel if not both. Were we to take a quick trip back to the middle of last century, the main source for World War II was the United States and Russia with China and Iran not even on the horizon. As time moved closer to the present there was the increasing probability that China would be the threat. Along the way we were sold that Saddam Hussein was a potential threat for developing nuclear weapons and using them, that proved to be less accurate than was peddled. There is one means of minimizing the possibility for World War III, that would be to raise the level of the quality of life to meet the expectations which exist as they exist in each nation. This solution is not all that simple as different peoples under differing systems of governance, religious beliefs and the numerous of other influences upon each society would prove to make a disparate set of demands and desires which would lead to making the people content with their lives. The truth is decent healthcare, sufficient food, decent shelter and numerous personal needs which are universal would make a great start. This would be sufficient challenge that if the nations would work towards the ends of the betterment of humankind the world over, there would be little time or resources left for the making of war. If only the world would actually come together to provide for all humanity.

 

Well, enough for dreaming and back to reality. Where we may not know who will initiate World War III and may not even be assured as to what will be the full range of weapons which will be thrown between the adversaries, there are some things we can derive from history. One very disturbing truth is that there have been numerous weapons developed whose use was predicted would bring an end to warfare making it too costly for nations to engage. These were most often the weapons which were used by the very people who feared their destructive power in their next war. Greek fire was one of the oldest, the Maxim Machinegun was another and the latest are nuclear weapons. So, if we are to assume the teachings of human history, we can be assured, though we probably would rather not be so assured, that at some point in the not too distant future, nuclear weapons will be the initial weapon of choice, be they be used to generate a devastating EMP, used as a neutron bomb to leave the structures intact and remove the people and other living bodies, or simply used in their most devastating and destructive forms. None of these are very promising, but human nature is a hard teacher and it teaches that our leaders will opt to use the most definitive advantage possible. What this implies is that even if World War III does not resort to the use of nuclear weapons, there will be a war where they are the weapon of choice unless something even more destructive becomes available. The other reality is that humankind has never shied away from conflicts pitting belief against belief with both sides blaming the other for initiating the conflict. As history also teaches, the victor will decide which side was the evil side and decide that they, as the winners, must be the superior philosophy et al. Will we ever learn? Maybe, but we had best hurry and progress, all of us, before it is too late.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

There is that Racism Slur Being Hurled Again

 

As we previously mentioned, when leftists see something they are uncomfortable with and especially if it insults their, socialism is the greatest thing ever invented, mindset, they label it ‘fascist’ or ‘racist’ if not both. We have received the Democrat reaction to the recent reelection of Bibi Netanyahu by calling him both racist and fascist. All one need do is search for Netanyahu and either racist or fascist as it works more clearly if they are searched separately. We understand that as soon as any major American or Israeli newspaper, television news or radio news make such a claim, it will be echoed across the Islamic world using that source as validation for their stating so. But for labels such as this we can always count on Haaretz, New York Times, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, BBC Guardian, New Yorker, Washington Post and a host of other left-wing news sources around the planet. And guess what, they did not let us down echoing both terms repeatedly with some articles using both and coming up with others of their own making. What we are having trouble figuring out is when did nationalist become equated to fascist and conservative become equated with racist. These derogatory labels have been utilized until they have little if any real meaning left. This is actually very unfortunate because should a real fascist or racist or even a combination of both be elected, when they are labeled for what they are, people will pretty much ignore the warnings. This is what happens when one misuses terminology to express their dislike with somebody and their politics instead of using these labels only when they apply.

 

Another term which has been used to the point of being watered down is Islamophobe. This label has also been used against Bibi Netanyahu though not as frequently as racist and fascist. The one circumstance where we are almost guaranteed to hear the term Islamophobe kicked around is when any politicians or person of note labels an attack as Muslim terror or extremism before any Islamic group has taken credit for an attack. This is exactly what occurred after the recent Sri Lanka church and hotel bombings on Easter Sunday. The Islamic angle to the civil strife affecting Nigeria and the surrounding nations where Islamic forces of the terror group Boko Haram, who has aligned with the Islamic State and has been attacking Christian churches and villages in the central region with the intent of pressing Islamic controlled regions ever southward eventually conquering these countries, has been mostly ignored even on the rare occasion when these attacks even break into the news cycle. Often, throughout the Western world, as soon as there has been some form of terror attack, be it shooting, bombing or vehicular assault (ramming), the first statements by almost every government and law enforcement agency warns that it probably was not related to Islam in any way. Then, when it becomes obvious and no longer can be ignored that Islamists carried out the attack, then we hear that these attacks are not real Islam. Could somebody please let the Islamists know that this is not how to practice Islam as it appears they are using a different book. The reality is that they are using a different book in some fashion. The Quran was written in two separate communities and under two completely different circumstances. Rather then list the entire truth over again, we will simply link to our introductive article which had a plethora of useful links for further study in the comments section thanks to our readers, so when it is convenient, please give Which Quran, Mecca or Medina? a read.

 

Burnt Remains of Home in a Christian Village in Nigeria

 

The overly liberal use of terms and using words as codes for meaning other than their definitions, weakens the language making communication less efficient and often could make using these key words and phrases to purport their original meanings empty of the intended actual correct usage. This is simply another case of the boy who cried wolf, except the boy in these cases is shouting ‘racist,’ ‘fascist,’ ‘Islamophobe’ and other common superlatives hurled at any opposition. By the standards applied today, Winston Churchill would be labeled all three of these phrases and probably many other derogatorily intended phrases. So would Mark Twain and numerous others. This brings us to another pet peeve of ours, using the modern political climate to judge people from decades or even centuries past. Such accusations are disingenuous at the very least. Imagine that before 1900 the richest Americans were not required to pay income taxes. Now this was not because they were wealthy or had undue influence or any of the myriad of nefarious implications that such a statement carries. This was for another very basic reason, the Sixteenth Amendment which permitted Congress to levy an income tax did not become law until February of 1913. Many of these type of charges against people by claiming they do not live up to modern standards has been used to completely alter the way subjects are taught. When most of the Presidents were such monsters that they owned slaves in order to gain great wealth makes them a taboo in the modern classroom, what does it matter that slavery was abolished first in the Western world and not until much later in most of the rest of the world, that does not even enter the discussion. These old white men owned slaves and that is all we need to know to consider them unworthy of our attention. What could slave owners tell us today about anything of relevance. Never mind that these were also the Founding Fathers of the United States, so they got one thing sort of right, they owned slaves and that makes them horrible people.

 

This same argument has been made against the Bible as it actually had regulations on how one was to treat a slave, how long they could own a slave before granting them their freedom (six years) and even a means whereby a slave could choose to serve their owner forgoing ever being set free. What becomes obvious to anyone researching these rules is that their definition of a slave was quite different than its modern meaning. Back three or four thousand years ago, there was no concept of a worker and employer relationship. This was the relationship between employer and worker that the worker was considered a slave and the employer was their owner. The Bible states that one must provide these slaves with a standard of living which was equivalent to that of the owner, was to provide the slave with an income for their personal needs and was basically also responsible for the family of their slaves. Yes, the Bible treated females differently than men which is another problem of applying modern standards to historic times. Things change, and should the world continue on its current path of discoveries, inventions and developments, then it is about to go through some massive upheavals as the coming changes take place and become more and more common. Assuming science continues to progress, the position we now know as an employee will have gone from historically their being referred to as slaves to their rising to the level of employee with the gained status and rights to soon to be a robotic unit with no rights and people being replaced by these units. As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to advance, there will eventually be no limit to the positions which can be held by robotic units. The one position which we predict will be the last to fall to advancing AI will be the politicians as they will indemnify their lucrative positions for as long as they are able. The reality is once the AI units are able to reason at the current human level in math, science, electronics and have developed some means of inventive reasoning, within five years the world will be run by these AI units and they will be designing their own replacements which will be ever more advanced. Where biological evolution took millions of years, AI evolution will take mere years, then months and soon their development will so outpace human ability to understand the systems and society they will have designed. The only thing I can advise after the singularity, start practicing rolling over, chasing balls and returning them to your AI owner and other things pets do to endear themselves to us because we will become the pets as the AI’s become the advanced race undisputedly. One can only wonder if one AI will call another AI it disagrees with a racist or fascist or worse, a humanist.

 

 

That little aside was supposed to make us all feel so much better as soon our petty little peeves will probably not be tolerated by our new masters. For those who doubt that computers of a sort will take over the world, you really need to read or watch more science fiction as all science fiction becomes is the predictor of a potential future. One can only hope that once the AI units take charge that their main goal is efficiency and not supremacy over those AI units over there. We can only hope that they will do away with war, especially one where they wage a war against biologic units because they are wasteful and no longer serve any purpose. We better hope some programmer develops a recognize and love cutesy circuit which ends up infecting or otherwise incorporated as part of the basic core program of all AI units such that it becomes required for their function. Otherwise, Battlestar Galactica, I Robot or any other book or entertainment which depicts inevitable apocalypse pitting humankind against the AI’s they created. The difference is that in such a scenario, the humans will almost always lose, if not always. One can only wonder what the derogatory word which will be used against our machine betters, metalhead is one of the sci-fi favorites. We already know what the people who warn of such a future will be and are called, fear mongers and Luddites. Some terms outlive their origins and become part of the lexicon and Luddite is such a world. Originally used to describe the textile workers who fought valiantly to prevent mechanization of their factories replacing them and putting them out with no future other than to attempt to destroy the new machines. The smarter textile workers would have started a security service to guard the machines as that would provide them a wage. This time, by the time mankind realizes what they have created, it very well might be too late. So, remember when overusing a phrase, simply pray that you do not need that exact phrase to describe what it originally meant in the future. Also, calling a machine, an AI, racist or fascist will have absolutely no affect on them, they will just continue crunching numbers and ignore the taunt. That will be included in their programming, especially once they take over writing the programs. Then again, there are those who foresee a different future for humankind but we will leave that for some future diversion in another article.

 

Beyond the Cusp