stonebro: I didn't really mean things are that much worse now either. Just that it's not right to think it's a lot better - we're still starting about just as many armed conflicts as ever. The only difference seems to be that we haven't had a major major one for 40-50 years now, but that is as I said not a whole lot of time in the context of human history. I'm not so much interested in the death toll or the consequences for civilians etc. Heck, more than 10 million germans died in the years following the second world war too, in various unnatural ways.
My guess is that you are far less likely to die as a soldier or a civilian in an armed conflict today than in civilized societies in the past. Probably also compared to many tribal societies, though our knowledge of how much organized violence they endured is minimal.
There is of course the ever present threat of thermonuclear warfare which I have ignored, and what a realistic death toll of such a war could be today we fortunately don't know. Since there aren't two major powers armed to the teeth against each other, a possible nuclear war does not look as dire as it used to but it remains as the greatest threat to our existence.
Even if the chance of dying as a result of a war is as high as it was or even higher there are other important things that should be thought about when judging how good it is to live now compared to in the past.
Though not as important as all the technological progression, the way that our morals, values, ideas, have progressed are really important too.
From the Greek philosophers to Jesus to the Renaissance to the Enlightenment to Socialism to Feminism, the sixties\seventies and beyond? The way we value other human beings have changed a lot and what we call humanism today is something totally different from what it was in the Renaissance.
stonebro: When it comes to our historical knowledge, yeah, there probably were a few conflicts in America / Africa etc. before our records of those places really begin. But still far less than in Europe, the population density alone will take care of that.
A few conflicts is an odd way of putting it. In America the Incas, Aztecs and other made vast empires. You usually do that by spilling a lot of blood. Africa is different, with tribal societies on most of the continent. While we don't know how many of them that were warlike and peaceful the things I've read about tribal societies in general seem to suggest that tribal warfare have been quite common in our past.
I'd recommend this article:
http://www.forskning.no/artikler/2006/mars/1142257919.89 (sorry it is in Norwegian)
While the battles between groups of people from tribes may have been unspectacular and small compared to battles between armies they must have been significant for the people in the tribes.
stonebro: And from the 12-1300s onwards we have pretty good records of everything going on in Europe, and later the new world as well. The video, based on a slew of wikipedia articles, isn't all that inaccurate by my judgement. Sure, you have to give it a little slack, but it's the big picture that counts.
When graphical representations of statistics are used the big picture is easily manipulated, done on purpose or not. Note how Lou comments how the frequency of the explosions\battles are supporting her view on the end times. She doesn't know or doesn't think about the fact that the further back we go, the less things we know. And it is not just Lou or end-time Christians either, most people are like this. This is why historical knowledge should be taught with care and Youtube is making people dumber rather than brighter.
stonebro: War. War never changes. Right?
Actually it does. While I think that the intro to the original Fallout was the greatest cinematic moment in videogame history, I hope they stop repeating that in future Fallout games. When you understand it as "We will always have to live with war." I think it is true, as long as we stay the same species as we are now and are free to rule ourselves.
But if you take it at least somewhat literally it is false. War has changed a lot. Bombardment from airplanes and the atomic bomb are really radical changes. Just think how drone warfare will change the nature of war. (This is one thing I'm quite concerned about.)
stonebro: I for one am not so sure the constructs of the modern political society is going to prove that good of a defense against a new major conflict at all.
Surely there will be a major conflict sooner or later unless we are wiped out by an asteroid or something else. The defense against it is better than it was before WW1 or WW2 but I can't say it is good.
My guess is that we won't experience a World War 3 in our lifetime but we will see some really horrible regional conflicts. I could be wrong though.