Yea you’re right. I could have been way more precise. Bit to loose and unclear from my side. Apologies.
My point is more that war isn’t only when people and weapons are fighting other people with weapons. It’s also when one country entices another country to go into debt with them. Or when a bunch of hackers attack energy grids.
It just looked like saying fuck war just isn’t very helpful, even though I definitely hate it as much as the next Bitcoiner.
The thought came from the idea that all life forms strive to expand until they run into some sort of limiting factor. Societies seem to do the same. The limiting factor on one front, for humans/societies, seem to be land used by other societies, thus we always have strife/power projection/war on that plain. And that plain is always limited making war (defensive or offensive) necessary to protect ‘your’ life form.
Perhaps the problem that we currently organize under states that can fiat us into war and fund them. Which exacerbates the problem enormously. And perhaps we can indeed progress to a softwar state where physical war is impossible to fund/ execute on. I definitely hope to see it.
We’re probably on the same page with the idea behind ‘fuck war’, I just wanted to give a tiny poke to do a little better. Just like you seem to do with your comment to me (thank you).
Because whatever way we cut it, we might not be interested in war, but war is interested in us, our families and our friends.
@romanleonardo / Roman Leonardo
npub1dm…k6zky
2024-08-09 18:17:31
in reply to nevent1q…35jt
Author Public Key
npub1dmyh8jjw8gj42d4k3kzkcuxylpnxzrtj2dhyj6gavnwg9pewn6sq7k6zkyPublished at
2024-08-09 18:17:31Event JSON
{
"id": "18ff9b31a73d4c413a30ecba373b6731ecbb4b934e90129acc73110f9b849b68",
"pubkey": "6ec973ca4e3a255536b68d856c70c4f866610d72536e49691d64dc82872e9ea0",
"created_at": 1723227451,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ee0eca4a128c4c3e8cb140bdd14edf37c31487e9760b4d32a9ff1780fdd9c8c3",
"wss://a.nos.lol",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1b65fa35d57748b48f0c63794f7f88ea3fb9f89b2f88d8f720ae6872762becea",
"wss://a.nos.lol",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"3b7550d595ec596f8d3a959823deead90a330e347ba423953058ea67aa34878f"
]
],
"content": "Yea you’re right. I could have been way more precise. Bit to loose and unclear from my side. Apologies. \n\nMy point is more that war isn’t only when people and weapons are fighting other people with weapons. It’s also when one country entices another country to go into debt with them. Or when a bunch of hackers attack energy grids. \n\nIt just looked like saying fuck war just isn’t very helpful, even though I definitely hate it as much as the next Bitcoiner. \n\nThe thought came from the idea that all life forms strive to expand until they run into some sort of limiting factor. Societies seem to do the same. The limiting factor on one front, for humans/societies, seem to be land used by other societies, thus we always have strife/power projection/war on that plain. And that plain is always limited making war (defensive or offensive) necessary to protect ‘your’ life form. \n\nPerhaps the problem that we currently organize under states that can fiat us into war and fund them. Which exacerbates the problem enormously. And perhaps we can indeed progress to a softwar state where physical war is impossible to fund/ execute on. I definitely hope to see it. \n\nWe’re probably on the same page with the idea behind ‘fuck war’, I just wanted to give a tiny poke to do a little better. Just like you seem to do with your comment to me (thank you). \n\nBecause whatever way we cut it, we might not be interested in war, but war is interested in us, our families and our friends.",
"sig": "a01ee1d71ef563b517aa8f58c6b8a2b284c5ae8c6fd13e5cd8074eea69879bbb3d6064a23924294a89d4df554f12b41a907e00029c87aa256584cfad8f244bc9"
}