Though most realists do not explicitly endorse instinctual theories of war, there are some obvious parallels with their negative view of human nature, especially.
Table of contents
Drawing upon evolutionary and ecological models, the archaeological record of the origins of war, nomadic forager societies past and present, the value and limitations of primate analogies, and the evolution of agonism and restraint, the chapters here refute many popular generalizations and effectively bring scientific objectivity to the culturally and historically controversial subjects of war, peace, and human nature.
Don't have an account? Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use for details see www. University Press Scholarship Online. Publications Pages Publications Pages. Search my Subject Specializations: Classical, Early, and Medieval Plays and Playwrights: Classical, Early, and Medieval Poetry and Poets: Classical, Early, and Medieval Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval World History: Civil War American History: Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.
Douglas P. Fry
War, Peace, and Human Nature: Fry Abstract Have humans always waged war? More Have humans always waged war? It is too great a task to identify a common cause of all wars, past and present, then attribute it responsibility for their commencing. The former accounts well for conflicts that were overwhelmingly state-centric, such as the First World War, and marks a clear distinction between war and individual political violence: However, is the Vietnam War to be understood—like the Korean—as a simple north versus south conflict, despite the northern state only assuming active involvement nine years after indigenous fighting broke out in ?
While a simple merging of the two definitions would not suffice, there are some similarities to be observed.
War and Human Nature - The American Interest
Both imply in the Clausewitzian sense that war is a tool used to achieve ends: The latter definition will be qualified by the observation that all actors engaged in war, be they NLF in Vietnam, or Ansar al-Dine in Mali, do so in hierarchical groups. While it is accepted that wars have an almost infinite number of unique causes, the pursuit of a primary explanation has a long tradition.
It is their view that while rationality is pursued, it is—and will forever be—blighted by the underlying imperfections of humanity, among them, the propensity to war.
That man will essentially pursue his own interests and this, in the absence of a higher power, will lead to conflict Hobbes, , pp. Examples of such existences abound from the failed states of Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, and it is for this reason that man yields his freedoms to authority, the only guarantor of peace. The philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, too observed that: The state assumes the role of provider, acting too as arbitrator within its territory while its constituents obey.
But what of a world in which multiple states emerge?
- The Case for a Peaceful Past!
- War, Peace, and Human Nature: The Convergence of Evolutionary and Cultural Views.
- William the Baptist: annotated edition.
- Is War Primarily the Product of ‘Human Nature’?.
Many states have long histories, and those that fail are clearly exceptions to the rule. What is really at fault here is the pessimist view that human nature is irrationally inclined to violence. Clearly there is another variable, without which human nature cannot suffice as the primary cause of war.
This additional variable becomes apparent in further reading of Leviathan , specifically concerning the environment mankind inhabits. While it might seem this competition for resources is an alternative to the human nature claim to war, as will be seen, it is only by the combination of this factor and another of human nature, that war can be given any primary cause.
Please Consider Donating
Survival, dependent first and foremost on the securing of these resources, and secondly on their protection, is integral to the causation of wars. However, there remains another question: The answer is again found deeply embedded in one of the facets of man. As Hobbes observed, there is a great distrust among men. There had been an arms race in and all throughout Europe Mulligan, , p.
The likelihood of war here as a direct result of limitations imposed by human nature was irreversibly heightened, and the significance of this insurmountable fear—only dampened by defence spending—this limitation generates was exposed. Now that a culpable human nature has been established, it is now time to see where it stands among other theories of the causes of war. Central to all Realist beliefs about the state is that other states or entities cannot be relied on to guard the interests among them, base necessities of another, and by this mantra any collaboration will be limited.
The case Waltz himself presents, is that the cause of war among states is found at the systemic level, and is the absence of world government. Taken as such, anarchy sits comfortably as the permissive cause of war, while the expanded human nature fills the role of efficient.