“War is progress, peace is stagnation”

Horizon209

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2021
Messages
20
Points
43
What do you think about this concept? Do you agree or not. I want to incorporate this into my novel to be a little more realistic.
 
D

Deleted member 54065

Guest
True. A lot of inventions or modifications of those that we now use today are part of conflicts and adversity.

Like how canned food was developed because of Napoleonic Wars. Rocket (Missile) technology was researched (or further developed, given that the British army have the Congreve during the Napoleonic Wars, and before that, the Mysore Empire) because of Nazi Germany. And the most recent, the Internet, brought forth by the US Army's desire to have an efficient way to share interdepartment and interbranch information during the Cold War. (Please correct me in these if I'm mistaken)

While peace is 'ideally' good, there are a lot of instances in human history that peace led to the stagnation and eventual decline of a nation, a country or an empire.

I remember that saying: "Good men create good times. Good times create bad men. Bad men create bad times. And bad times create good men."

I think it fits that concept.
 

Ilikewaterkusa

You have to take out their families...
Joined
May 21, 2021
Messages
2,373
Points
153
True. A lot of inventions or modifications of those that we now use today are part of conflicts and adversity.

Like how canned food was developed because of Napoleonic Wars. Rocket (Missile) technology was researched (or further developed, given that the British army have the Congreve during the Napoleonic Wars, and before that, the Mysore Empire) because of Nazi Germany. And the most recent, the Internet, brought forth by the US Army's desire to have an efficient way to share interdepartment and interbranch information during the Cold War. (Please correct me in these if I'm mistaken)

While peace is 'ideally' good, there are a lot of instances in human history that peace led to the stagnation and eventual decline of a nation, a country or an empire.

I remember that saying: "Good men create good times. Good times create bad men. Bad men create bad times. And bad times create good men."

I think it fits that concept.
No it’s rather that military technology is dispersed out into the populace through the demilitarization of soldiers who got adjusted to new gadgets and these new gadgets are readapted into civilian products.
What do you think about this concept? Do you agree or not. I want to incorporate this into my novel to be a little more realistic.
Just have it be the ideology of some warmongering neo-con like George Bush junior
 
D

Deleted member 54065

Guest
No it’s rather that military technology is dispersed out into the populace through the demilitarization of soldiers who got adjusted to new gadgets and these new gadgets are readapted into civilian products.
Still though, one can't deny that these inventions, or at least, the concepts came from conflict. And I'm not only talking about militaristic conflicts.

For example, the heavier-than-air plane. While the Wright Brothers got the concept right, the fact remains that they were under a time constraint in trying to out-compete other developers during the time.
 

ArcadiaBlade

I'm a Lazy Writer, So What?
Joined
Dec 23, 2018
Messages
880
Points
133
War is business, peace is stagnation and conflict being a silent profit. The only thing that can improve the quality of human life is a threat.

Threat creates fear, fear induces improvement, improvements begets a new era and era births war.

The cycle continues as what our forefathers told.

I might have just snorted too much fruit powders trying to write this....
 

Dieter

the Writer
Joined
Mar 15, 2021
Messages
184
Points
133
The quote is too vague and lot of presuppositions go behind it. Sure its true in a few instances, but you only have to think for a few minutes to come up with contrary examples where war doesn't serve progress whilst peace does; and vice versa.

Still, there is nothing wrong to have a character say it.
 

vaurwyn

Everyone dies someday, but I'm procrastinating
Joined
Nov 30, 2021
Messages
151
Points
103
It's completely false.

"peace is stagnation" : what was invented during peacetime? cars, 1886; planes, 1903; phones (telegram) 1876; radio 1895; printing press 1436;
Looking back at history, we can easily disprove the idea that peace is stagnation.


"War is progress" : that is harder to disprove.
It sounds obvious, when looking at the two world wars, that that would be true. Radar, computers, penicillin, submarines were all developed during the world wars, it gives us the illusion of speedy progress.
However, while I cannot deny that technological progress is occuring, I view it in the same way I view those blood-burning techniques in anime. You sacrifice your future, your stable economy, the lives of your future inventors, and much more for an instant gain in strength that will immediately be used up by the enemy.
War brings pressure and motivation, and from that brings progress, but it also brings destruction. Just look at France and Germany after WW2, and you will see that any progress thay made in those wars really wasn't worth it.
Besides, war only helps technological progress, at the expense of any other form of it. For example, significant cultural progress, like the abolition of slavery, can only be made when poeple have time to reflect and realise thier mistakes, not when they are already short of manpower and blided by their potential doom.


I think war and peace can be likened to the dark and light side of the force in star wars. The dark side isn't more powerful or better than the light side, it is just much faster, while also having some serious drawbacks. The light side is much slower, but it is also infinitely more stable.
 

Redemit

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
640
Points
133
We talking technologically socially or philosophically?

I could argue that technology is always advancing regardless of peace or war but it does make some very interesting leaps during war that would not come about during peace

I could also say that "peace" which doesn't actually exist in our world at any time is never lasting it is a kind of stagnation and rot built on a slowly crumbling foundation of bones and blood and the only reason why it exists at all is generally because people are weary of war for a Time but peace will always leads to us back to war eventually

But what about philosophically now there is an interesting question when people and society are facing some form of mortal threat they become very introspective and philosophical they start seeing things differently they start learning things that they never bothered to learn before they start valuing things that they never value before war is death and death has an interesting way of making us value life and everything else that we hold dear

If you ever want to read something truly interesting read some of the letters from world war I and world war II written by soldiers in the trenches and on the front lines a lot of these people didn't even have a high school equivalent education and yet the letters that they wrote back home and the diaries that they wrote are very thought-provoking
 
Last edited:

LostLibrarian

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
709
Points
133
I would disagree with that. Not only because there is rarely stagnation in peace, the driving factor behind progress also isn't war. It's gains.

In the past, wars gave people a lot to gain hence they also invested a lot. Especially in the big wars, winning meant a lot of land, ressources, or people, so it made sense to invent new things to dominate wars. But nowadays?

With the invention of modern nuclear weapons and the fact that big wars are unlikely (or rather, might be worldending) innovation often runs ahead of the military and war preparations. We have civil technology that is years or even decades in front of most armies deployed, because the only profit to gain is for a handful of weapon manufacturers. But even most modern weapon systems sold are way behind the top of the art civil research.


And it's not weapons, you can see it in most fields. Let's take medicine. There are thousands of smaller/rare illnesses that modern medicine would probably able to treat/prevent with a few years of research. Yet they'll most likely never become treatable because the focus is on the solutions that bring a lot of money. Companies will throw 50 years of expensive research against cancer with no problem because that would give them an endless money tree... but better not get a "1 in 100.000" illness.



So yeah, while part of that statement was true in the past (though imho only through the possible gains), we have left it behind...
 

TroubleFait

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2020
Messages
86
Points
58
War is progress but "progress" isnt always better, sometimes things can change for the worse.
Also, sometimes war erases previously acquired progress, like how Europe managed to bear the Revolution out if France. It didn't stick but you get what I mean.

Peace doesn't always lead to stagnation even if it often encourages it, and the process of war can have vastly superior negative consequences than the positive outcome.
 

Amok

grblbrbl
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
421
Points
133
if you call monkes killing each other with bigger sticks progress, sure. i call monkes not killing each other at all progress, for such a state is in direct opposition to our animilistic natures. if the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki are progress then fuck it i wanna regress.
 

Cipiteca396

🌺🌑🐉🪶 Anxiety Overdrive
Joined
Jun 6, 2021
Messages
2,138
Points
153
While peace is 'ideally' good, there are a lot of instances in human history that peace led to the stagnation and eventual decline of a nation, a country or an empire.
There's far more cases in history where war led to the immediate destruction of nations, lol. A peaceful decline over time sounds more fun than getting bombed into oblivion right now.
What do you think about this concept? Do you agree or not. I want to incorporate this into my novel to be a little more realistic.
I don't fully agree. War can be a great wake up call for a stagnating nation, but peace =/= stagnation. There's these things that people like to call 'Golden Ages' where nothing-bad* is happening and events are still progressing rapidly.

There's two reasons why war seems to be good for progress. The first is that the advancements are highly visible. You can look at a machine gun and clearly see how much more advanced it is in its role than an older type of gun.
The second is propaganda. If you come up with a cool-new-thing, everyone will be happy about it. And since there's lots of things to upset you, learning about cool-new-thing will help alleviate how upset you are. The same advancements are being made all the time, there's just less reason to care about them. :sweat_smile:
 

Ilikewaterkusa

You have to take out their families...
Joined
May 21, 2021
Messages
2,373
Points
153
Go
There's far more cases in history where war led to the immediate destruction of nations, lol. A peaceful decline over time sounds more fun than getting bombed into oblivion right now.

I don't fully agree. War can be a great wake up call for a stagnating nation, but peace =/= stagnation. There's these things that people like to call 'Golden Ages' where nothing-bad* is happening and events are still progressing rapidly.

There's two reasons why war seems to be good for progress. The first is that the advancements are highly visible. You can look at a machine gun and clearly see how much more advanced it is in its role than an older type of gun.
The second is propaganda. If you come up with a cool-new-thing, everyone will be happy about it. And since there's lots of things to upset you, learning about cool-new-thing will help alleviate how upset you are. The same advancements are being made all the time, there's just less reason to care about them. :sweat_smile:
Golden ages are real. Example post ww2 America, rome during the five good emperors, roaring 20s
Based
if you call monkes killing each other with bigger sticks progress, sure. i call monkes not killing each other at all progress, for such a state is in direct opposition to our animilistic natures. if the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki are progress then fuck it i wanna regress.
For example, significant cultural progress, like the abolition of slavery, can only be made when poeple have time to reflect and realise thier mistakes, not when they are already short of manpower and blided by their potential doom.
BOOOOOOO!
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 54065

Guest
There's far more cases in history where war led to the immediate destruction of nations, lol. A peaceful decline over time sounds more fun than getting bombed into oblivion right now.
I don't think I'm comparing the number of cases between peacetime and wartime downfall of nations. I just said that there are a lot of cases. Lol
 

Amok

grblbrbl
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
421
Points
133
BOOOOOOO!

so if u shoot you through the brainpan with a shotgun that's progress. got it. our species is so blinded and awed by the flashing lights that it does not question the machine emitting them. if all the humans who have died up till now, lived lives of toil, if all of them have died just so that we can have bigger bombs then I don't see the point in progress. for me the erection of a simple well in a backwater village is more progressive than the culling of millions for this or that political or economic contingency. but sure throw more soldiers into the meat grinder, that'll make a bright future for our children.
 

Lloyd

Professional Writer
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
2,309
Points
153
It is more like struggle creates progress, while idleness is ultimately destructive. If things aren't getting better they are getting worse. Everything is in flux. War is merely a method for countries to struggle and improve. Long periods of peace create decadence, hedonism, and gluttony. There is no greater struggle, and opportunity to change than in war.
 

SailusGebel

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2020
Messages
8,871
Points
233
It is more like struggle creates progress, while idleness is ultimately destructive. If things aren't getting better they are getting worse. Everything is in flux. War is merely a method for countries to struggle and improve. Long periods of peace create decadence, hedonism, and gluttony. There is no greater struggle, and opportunity to change than in war.
 

Amok

grblbrbl
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
421
Points
133
why must struggle be violent? not seeing progress in that at all. why not struggle for your fellow beings instead of against them? and the ages of rome and america being decadent... are the ages of greater expansion. how far did rome's borders expand after the death of Kaesar and the abolution of the republic? how many innocents have america bombed in this millennium alone? Rome was not in peace when it fell, it merely had delegated its defense to mainly non-romans along with a plethora of other factors. peace and gluttony are called decadent... i see it as a species having no concern for hunger, no worry of their neighbor stabbing them in the back and therefore rest is warranted. bombing a school, pumping mustard gas into the trenches, taking women as sex slaves... that's not decadent? war's not decadent? At times you have to defend what's yours, but that's not noble, that's practical. but to set out and attack another nation, another people, wholesale massacre, taking out of eyes, smashing babies against concrete.... how is that something our species needs to 'progress?' All i see in scenarios like that are chimps hunting each other through the forest.
 
Top